新闻话语意义生成的系统功能修辞研究
|
摘要
当人类进入21世纪,以新闻话语为代表的大众传媒体裁群以前所未有的广度和深度渗入到社会机构的各个角落,成为文化体系采集和评价信息最具影响力的话语形式、新时期社会符号语义场运转的主要促动力量。本文认为,作为一门跨学科研究,新闻话语所涉及的两个主要学科——话语分析与新闻传播学——都可以溯源到亚里士多德的古典修辞学研究。20世纪后半叶以来,美国新修辞学的主体互联性认知观使修辞处于文化体系所有活动的中心、组织和规范人类的思想和行为的各个方面。新修辞学的领军人物肯尼斯?伯克在语言方面彻底采取维特根斯坦式的态度,在“戏剧主义”理论视角下探讨话语作用于现实的象征行动,认为话语的意义不在于一系列所指而在于作为意义行为建构现实,并为文化体系提供了一种具有客观力量的模具和生存环境,亦即占主导地位的修辞范式。正是在上述学科氛围与相应的现实关怀中,本文从语言哲学、伯克新修辞学、系统功能语言学、评价理论、新闻传播学的跨学科理论视阈中,通过阐释性的质化分析探索一条新闻话语之动态、可协商意义的篇章生成、个体生成与种系生成的系统功能修辞研究路径。
全文由八个章节组成。第一章首先概述了研究的背景,勾勒出以大众传媒为介质的意义生产中现实与修辞的关系,以及语言研究界对意义剖析的范式调整,然后列出本文的主要研究目的,并介绍本文的语料来源及组织结构。第二章在概述目前国内外的研究现状的基础上肯定了现今研究的主要成果并剖析了不足之处,在此基础上提出今后的研究发展方向即本文的研究任务:以伯克新修辞学、系统功能语言学及评价理论为主要理论框架,发展一个关于话语以及权力之生产性使用的肯定性论题,以利于对新闻话语意义生成的主体互联性修辞建构进行系统研究与实际应用。第三章首先将本文的研究建立在伯克的戏剧主义语言观上,即将语言视作象征性行动,并在此基础上提出了有待在随后章节中论证的研究假设:新闻话语自身通过系统功能修辞模式实现意义生成,并同时在系统功能修辞模式中构成并促进社会符号意义潜势的沿革。我们还概述了本文所汲取的主要理论的基本观点:伯克新修辞学、系统功能语言学、评价理论,并简要论述了本文所采用的主要研究方法。
第四章到第七章是本文论述的具体展开部分。
第四章首先明确了语境、修辞与真理之间的关系,在归纳出新闻话语语境特点之后探讨新闻话语如何与社会符号性语境构成连结体并产生密切互动。一方面,我们探讨新闻话语在协商性、顺应性及可变性的语用原则指导下顺应其以“单向性”、“准互动”为特征的语境进行意义生产;另一方面,我们指出意义生产的过程又成为互文性话语空间的有机组成部分,推进意识形态框架以及“知识—价值”复合体的形成。
第五章论述新闻话语概念意义的修辞建构。我们运用戏剧主义“五位一体”方法,分析新闻话语中场景、行为、执行者、手段和目的所形成的不同前景化“关系比”如何形成“术语规范”,以不同的动机性与导向性将新闻话语的“客观性”局限于具体的现实语境。考虑到不同主导修辞下的异质话语行为动机,我们还考察了多义性与国际新闻话语中的文字冲突,研究主体互联性的意义建构如何以信息的形式组合成稳定的概念框架,在话语冲突中争夺意义生产权力与流通空间。
第六章将新闻话语的人际意义修辞建构与当代语言学研究强调语言之人际的、变化的和可商议的意义的趋势相契合,研究新闻话语如何维护“客观性”的机构性修辞人格,在意义的篇章生成、个体生成、种系生成过程中促成、维护并发展意识形态“同一”与“同体”。本章着重利用评价理论介入子系统中的“摘引”概念,以探索、描写和解释新闻话语的直接引语如何被用来评价、采取立场、建构文本人格和协调人际立场和关系、建立话语联盟或分离等。
第七章以信息连贯为中心概念,讨论新闻话语篇章意义的修辞性实现。我们分别从“交际—认知”和“认识—价值”维度切入,一方面以信息性、冗余性和可及性为主要参数,阐述新闻话语如何支持传播者便捷地播撒所选择的信息及其所携带的评价意义的同时,使能受众以最小的认知努力获取最大的新信息量;另一方面挑战新闻语篇的线性信息连贯,提出我们所感知的连贯无不依托于特定的文化价值体系,因而实质上是一个“认识—价值”维度的信息格式塔。“交际—认知”维度的信息连贯作为喻体,与作为本体的“认识—价值”维度的信息达成连贯性上的“同一”。
第八章纵观全文,扼要总结了所提出的主要观点,指出了本研究的紧迫现实指导意义和深远理论架构意义。一方面,本研究积极应对入世后外国传媒进入中国后带来的机遇和挑战,有效实现对社会符号语义场的意识形态建构与维护;为面向21世纪的英语新闻复合型专业教学的诸核心课程提供有效和可行的理论参照。另一方面,意义生产的系统功能修辞研究有利于阐明意义生产的主体互联性修辞实现,以及传媒话语与主导修辞范式的辨证关系。
本文的创新点包括以下四个方面。
1)阐述新闻话语如何以信息传评价、以概念促说服。新闻话语本质上是组织并发布信息的戏剧,是无须辩论而直抵说服的终极修辞的体现,并以其概念意义与评价意义、信息给予功能与说服功能的共生同体作为“结构了的结构性结构”推进功能性社会符号意义潜势的发展,在受主导修辞范式约束的同时亦构成其基石。
2)建立新闻话语互文性意义生成的“修辞—评价”语义语用模式。通过对新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制的剖析,本文不仅将现有的评价意义研究从“词汇—语法”层面推进到篇章层面,还论证了新闻话语中对话与多声的协商往往演变为在评价意义的指挥棒下的多声部有序合奏,在使能语义认知的同时实现语用控制。
3)从信息连贯角度切入,提出新闻话语以“交际—认知”维度的信息连贯作为喻体,与作为本体的“认识—价值”维度的信息达成连贯性上的“同一”,使新闻话语以线性语言隐喻性地建构非线性现实,服务于构筑意识形态同体神话的动机。
4)尝试形成新闻话语意义生成的系统功能修辞理论框架。本文遵循功能主义的语言哲学观,将伯克新修辞学的戏剧主义语言观与韩礼德的社会符号性质语言观相结合,借用韩礼德的“系统—功能”思想,将伯克新修辞学的动机论、戏剧五位一体话语行动观、“同一”概念、文字学等基本思想重新整合并安置进入一个层级系统中,形成一个以象征性同一之动机为核心,并依次以戏剧五位一体诸要素、术语规范/文字学、未知等外环层面共同构成的本体论与认识论、个体认知与社会图景、话语行动与语言符号、已知与未知共生的大连结体系统,阐述意义生成如何以象征性话语行动介入社会秩序的建构及人类生存图景的演化,为跨越更多语类的话语意义修辞性生产研究提供参照。
Over the threshold of the 21~(st) century, the mass media genre colony, with news discourse as the representative, has permeated every social institution with an unprecedented breadth and depth. News discourse has become the most influential discursive type in a cultural entity, as well as the primary motivating force of the evolution of the socio-semiotic semantic field. An adequate probe into the semogenesis of news discourse, as an interdisciplinary research, necessarily spans the two major fields of discourse analysis and communication studies, both of which can be traced back to the Aristotelian rhetoric. In the 20th century, rhetoric, once disparaged as a relic of the outmoded classical curriculum, comes into its own as intertwined with a language philosophy strongly influenced by social constructionism and intersubjective epistemology, and assumes a central position in all discursive actions in a cultural entity as the basic principle that all informative and persuasive genres—with news discourse as the epitome—abide by. Language is no longer held as an autonomous sign system but as a meaning-making activity vibrantly engaging in the construction of the socio-political cultural scenario. In particular, Kenneth Burke, the standard-bearer of American new rhetoric, adopts a thorough Wittgensteinian attitude towards language, acknowledges the contingency of the language we use, and contends that meaning lies not in the signified but in versioning a reality which in turn prescribes a dominant paradigm of rhetoric in our discursive universe.
Set against the above disciplinary landscapes and motivated by a keen interest in the contemporary operation of news discourse, this ongoing research synthesizes and develops language philosophy, the Burkean new rhetoric, the Hallidayan Systemic Functional Linguistics as well as the APPRAISAL Theory as its latest development, and communication studies, so as to unravel how semogenesis in and through news discourse, on the one hand, is enabled and constrained by a systemic-functional rhetoric in the socio-semiotic semantic field, and on the other hand, promotes the construal and development of dynamic, negotiable logogenesis, ontogenesis and phylogenesis through motivated and orientated symbolic discourse act.
This dissertation is organized into eight chapters. Chapter One begins by outlining the background in which this study is set against, i.e., the relationship between rhetoric and mass-mediated reality, as well as the contemporary adjustment in probes into meaning. It then proceeds to specify the research objectives and to introduce our data collection as well as the layout of this study. Chapter Two surveys literature on news discourse analysis both at home and abroad, and proposes the future research orientation after a critical analysis of present research findings. We specify this study as an attempt to fulfill the mission to develop an affirmative research agenda in the productive use of discourse and power, through a systemic-functional study of the intersubjective semogenesis of news discourse rhetoric. Chapter Three locates this study on the assumption of language as symbolic action, and proceeds to list our research hypotheses on the systemic-functional rhetoric of semogenesis in and through news discourse. We then sketch the chief theoretic sources this study draws upon as well as the methodology to be employed.
The next four chapters, from Chapter Four to Seven, unfold our research scheme and testify our research hypotheses.
Chapter Four starts by explicating the relationship between context, rhetoric and truth, and investigates how news discourse interacts and develops a nexus with the socio-semiotic context. On the one hand, we investigate how news discourse adapts—in terms of negotiability, adaptability and variability—to socio-cultural context characterized by“pseudo-interaction”and“monologicality”to facilitate its semogenesis. On the other hand, we explore how the process and product of semogenesis constitute an organic interdiscursive and intertextual universe so as to propel the framing of ideology and the generation of the knowledge-value complex.
Chapter Five is devoted to the rhetorical realization of ideational meaning. With the Burkean dramatistic pentad, we analyze how the foregrounded ratios between scene, act, agent, agency and purpose in news discourse develop into different terministic screens, and confine with particular motive and orientation the objectiveness of news discourse to specific socio-cultural context. Taking into account the heterogeneity of discursive motives under divergent rhetorical paradigms, we proceed to probe into polysemy and logomachy in news discourse, so as to study how the intersubjectively constructed meanings develop into stable conceptual frameworks in the form of information which vie for legitimacy of semogenesis and space of circulation in the discursive universe.
Chapter Six connects the rhetorical construction of interpersonal meaning in news discourse with the contemporary research trend in linguistics to emphasize the interpersonal, variable and negotiable meaning, and explores how news discourse pursues objectivity in order to defend its institutional ethos, so that it can maintain and develop ideological identification and consubstantiality through the logogenesis, ontogenesis and phylogenesis of meaning. In particular, we employ the“attribution”concept in the ENGAGEMENT subsystem of the APPRAISAL Theory, with an aim to shed light on how the myth of direct speech is exploited to appraise, take stance, construct textual persona, coordinate interpersonal stances and relations, and establish discursive alliance or division.
Chapter Seven, with informational coherence as the binding concept, is contributed to the rhetorical realization of textual meaning in news discourse from respectively the dimensions of“communication-cognition”and“epistemology-axiology”. On the“communication-cognition”dimension, with informativeness, redundancy and accessibility as major parameters, this chapter studies how news discourse facilitates communicators’swift dissemination of the selected information together with the appraisal meaning attached, while enabling audiences to acquire maximum new information with minimum cognitive efforts. On the“epistemology-axiology”dimension, this chapter challenges linear coherence by contending that the perceived coherence is underpinned with cultural-specific value system, and hence is virtually an“epistemological-axiological”information gestalt. Furthermore, we contend informational coherence as metaphorical, with informational coherence on the“communication-cognition”dimension functioning as a vehicle to identify with the informational coherence on the“epistemology-axiology”dimension as a tenor, so as to establish the myth of coherence in ideological consubstantiation.
Chapter Eight briefly concludes major research findings in this dissertation, and points out the pressing strategic significance for journalistic practitioners, as well as the profound importance for the design and development of future theoretical framework on meaning. Especially, for Chinese journalists and editors alike, this study helps to prepare them for the challenges and opportunities brought by foreign media’s newly-emerging presence in China, enabling them to effectively construct and maintain the ideology of socio-semiotic semantic field. Besides, this study provides feasible theoretical guidance for core curricula in the English-journalism major. Theoretically, the systemic-functional rhetoric presented in this study explicates the intersubjective and rhetorical realization of semogenesis, shedding light on the dialectics between mass-mediated discourse and dominant rhetorical paradigm.
The research creativity in this dissertation is manifest in the following four aspects. To begin with, we explicate how news discourse evaluates through information, and persuades while shaping ideation and epistemology. News discourse is fundamentally a symbolic drama that structures and releases information, serving the dual function of both information-offering and persuasion. The persuasion without argumentation in news discourse constitutes the ultimate rhetoric. Therefore, news discourse, as the“structuring structured structure”, propels the maintenance and updating of the socio-semiotic meaning potential, constructing the cornerstone for dominant rhetorical paradigm while being constrained by the dominant mode of rhetoric.
Furthermore, we construct a“rhetoric-appraisal”semantic-pragmatic model of the intertextual semogenesis in news discourse. Through a detailed analysis of the“rhetoric-appraisal”mechanism in direct speech in news discourse, we not only elevate the present research on appraisal meaning from lexico-grammatical level to textual level, but prove how the dialogue and heteroglossic negotiation in news discourse are relegated to an orchestrated performance in multi-voice-parts with particular appraisal meaning functioning as the conducting baton, so as to realize pragmatic control while enabling semantic cognition.
Besides, we contend that the informational coherence, as the rhetorical realization of textual meaning in news discourse, is metaphorically constructed with coherence on the“communication-cognition”dimension as the vehicle and coherence on the“epistemology-axiology”dimension as the tenor, Moreover, we argue that coherence from the two dimensions are identified to enable news discourse to metaphorically construct the non-linear reality with linear strings of linguistic signs so as to serve the motive of establishing a myth of coherent ideological consubstantiality.
Last but not least, we attempt to develop a systemic-functional rhetoric of semogenesis in and through news discourse. By marrying the Burkean grammar of motives, rhetoric of motives and logology into the Hallidayan systemic-functional framework, our systemic-functional rhetoric emphasizes both ontologically language-as-action and epistemologically language-as-symbolic-system, recognizing both language-in-use and language-as-system. We proceed to stratify this systemic-functional rhetoric by positioning the motive of symbolic identification at its core, which spurs action and powers the permutation and combination of the dramatistic elements in the second layer of dramatistic action, where scene, act, agent, agency and purpose are motivated to develop into ratios shaping the subsequent discursive and semantic configuration. When ratios in action and circulation develop into terministic screens to organize subsequent epistemology, we enter the third layer of the systemic-functional rhetoric, i.e., that of logology, beyond which lies the fourth layer of the unknown, which opens up to a yet-to-be-acquainted universe of possibilities, discoveries and dialogues. In this way, our systemic-functional rhetoric is a nexus of ontology and epistemology, individual cognition and social scenario, discursive acts and linguistic signs, as well as the known and the unknown. As a theoretical framework for the semogenesis across a variety of genres, our systemic-functional rhetoric serves to explicate how semogenesis is enabled through symbolic action, which in turn is actively engaged in the construction of social discursive order and the evolution of cultural scenario.
全文由八个章节组成。第一章首先概述了研究的背景,勾勒出以大众传媒为介质的意义生产中现实与修辞的关系,以及语言研究界对意义剖析的范式调整,然后列出本文的主要研究目的,并介绍本文的语料来源及组织结构。第二章在概述目前国内外的研究现状的基础上肯定了现今研究的主要成果并剖析了不足之处,在此基础上提出今后的研究发展方向即本文的研究任务:以伯克新修辞学、系统功能语言学及评价理论为主要理论框架,发展一个关于话语以及权力之生产性使用的肯定性论题,以利于对新闻话语意义生成的主体互联性修辞建构进行系统研究与实际应用。第三章首先将本文的研究建立在伯克的戏剧主义语言观上,即将语言视作象征性行动,并在此基础上提出了有待在随后章节中论证的研究假设:新闻话语自身通过系统功能修辞模式实现意义生成,并同时在系统功能修辞模式中构成并促进社会符号意义潜势的沿革。我们还概述了本文所汲取的主要理论的基本观点:伯克新修辞学、系统功能语言学、评价理论,并简要论述了本文所采用的主要研究方法。
第四章到第七章是本文论述的具体展开部分。
第四章首先明确了语境、修辞与真理之间的关系,在归纳出新闻话语语境特点之后探讨新闻话语如何与社会符号性语境构成连结体并产生密切互动。一方面,我们探讨新闻话语在协商性、顺应性及可变性的语用原则指导下顺应其以“单向性”、“准互动”为特征的语境进行意义生产;另一方面,我们指出意义生产的过程又成为互文性话语空间的有机组成部分,推进意识形态框架以及“知识—价值”复合体的形成。
第五章论述新闻话语概念意义的修辞建构。我们运用戏剧主义“五位一体”方法,分析新闻话语中场景、行为、执行者、手段和目的所形成的不同前景化“关系比”如何形成“术语规范”,以不同的动机性与导向性将新闻话语的“客观性”局限于具体的现实语境。考虑到不同主导修辞下的异质话语行为动机,我们还考察了多义性与国际新闻话语中的文字冲突,研究主体互联性的意义建构如何以信息的形式组合成稳定的概念框架,在话语冲突中争夺意义生产权力与流通空间。
第六章将新闻话语的人际意义修辞建构与当代语言学研究强调语言之人际的、变化的和可商议的意义的趋势相契合,研究新闻话语如何维护“客观性”的机构性修辞人格,在意义的篇章生成、个体生成、种系生成过程中促成、维护并发展意识形态“同一”与“同体”。本章着重利用评价理论介入子系统中的“摘引”概念,以探索、描写和解释新闻话语的直接引语如何被用来评价、采取立场、建构文本人格和协调人际立场和关系、建立话语联盟或分离等。
第七章以信息连贯为中心概念,讨论新闻话语篇章意义的修辞性实现。我们分别从“交际—认知”和“认识—价值”维度切入,一方面以信息性、冗余性和可及性为主要参数,阐述新闻话语如何支持传播者便捷地播撒所选择的信息及其所携带的评价意义的同时,使能受众以最小的认知努力获取最大的新信息量;另一方面挑战新闻语篇的线性信息连贯,提出我们所感知的连贯无不依托于特定的文化价值体系,因而实质上是一个“认识—价值”维度的信息格式塔。“交际—认知”维度的信息连贯作为喻体,与作为本体的“认识—价值”维度的信息达成连贯性上的“同一”。
第八章纵观全文,扼要总结了所提出的主要观点,指出了本研究的紧迫现实指导意义和深远理论架构意义。一方面,本研究积极应对入世后外国传媒进入中国后带来的机遇和挑战,有效实现对社会符号语义场的意识形态建构与维护;为面向21世纪的英语新闻复合型专业教学的诸核心课程提供有效和可行的理论参照。另一方面,意义生产的系统功能修辞研究有利于阐明意义生产的主体互联性修辞实现,以及传媒话语与主导修辞范式的辨证关系。
本文的创新点包括以下四个方面。
1)阐述新闻话语如何以信息传评价、以概念促说服。新闻话语本质上是组织并发布信息的戏剧,是无须辩论而直抵说服的终极修辞的体现,并以其概念意义与评价意义、信息给予功能与说服功能的共生同体作为“结构了的结构性结构”推进功能性社会符号意义潜势的发展,在受主导修辞范式约束的同时亦构成其基石。
2)建立新闻话语互文性意义生成的“修辞—评价”语义语用模式。通过对新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制的剖析,本文不仅将现有的评价意义研究从“词汇—语法”层面推进到篇章层面,还论证了新闻话语中对话与多声的协商往往演变为在评价意义的指挥棒下的多声部有序合奏,在使能语义认知的同时实现语用控制。
3)从信息连贯角度切入,提出新闻话语以“交际—认知”维度的信息连贯作为喻体,与作为本体的“认识—价值”维度的信息达成连贯性上的“同一”,使新闻话语以线性语言隐喻性地建构非线性现实,服务于构筑意识形态同体神话的动机。
4)尝试形成新闻话语意义生成的系统功能修辞理论框架。本文遵循功能主义的语言哲学观,将伯克新修辞学的戏剧主义语言观与韩礼德的社会符号性质语言观相结合,借用韩礼德的“系统—功能”思想,将伯克新修辞学的动机论、戏剧五位一体话语行动观、“同一”概念、文字学等基本思想重新整合并安置进入一个层级系统中,形成一个以象征性同一之动机为核心,并依次以戏剧五位一体诸要素、术语规范/文字学、未知等外环层面共同构成的本体论与认识论、个体认知与社会图景、话语行动与语言符号、已知与未知共生的大连结体系统,阐述意义生成如何以象征性话语行动介入社会秩序的建构及人类生存图景的演化,为跨越更多语类的话语意义修辞性生产研究提供参照。
Over the threshold of the 21~(st) century, the mass media genre colony, with news discourse as the representative, has permeated every social institution with an unprecedented breadth and depth. News discourse has become the most influential discursive type in a cultural entity, as well as the primary motivating force of the evolution of the socio-semiotic semantic field. An adequate probe into the semogenesis of news discourse, as an interdisciplinary research, necessarily spans the two major fields of discourse analysis and communication studies, both of which can be traced back to the Aristotelian rhetoric. In the 20th century, rhetoric, once disparaged as a relic of the outmoded classical curriculum, comes into its own as intertwined with a language philosophy strongly influenced by social constructionism and intersubjective epistemology, and assumes a central position in all discursive actions in a cultural entity as the basic principle that all informative and persuasive genres—with news discourse as the epitome—abide by. Language is no longer held as an autonomous sign system but as a meaning-making activity vibrantly engaging in the construction of the socio-political cultural scenario. In particular, Kenneth Burke, the standard-bearer of American new rhetoric, adopts a thorough Wittgensteinian attitude towards language, acknowledges the contingency of the language we use, and contends that meaning lies not in the signified but in versioning a reality which in turn prescribes a dominant paradigm of rhetoric in our discursive universe.
Set against the above disciplinary landscapes and motivated by a keen interest in the contemporary operation of news discourse, this ongoing research synthesizes and develops language philosophy, the Burkean new rhetoric, the Hallidayan Systemic Functional Linguistics as well as the APPRAISAL Theory as its latest development, and communication studies, so as to unravel how semogenesis in and through news discourse, on the one hand, is enabled and constrained by a systemic-functional rhetoric in the socio-semiotic semantic field, and on the other hand, promotes the construal and development of dynamic, negotiable logogenesis, ontogenesis and phylogenesis through motivated and orientated symbolic discourse act.
This dissertation is organized into eight chapters. Chapter One begins by outlining the background in which this study is set against, i.e., the relationship between rhetoric and mass-mediated reality, as well as the contemporary adjustment in probes into meaning. It then proceeds to specify the research objectives and to introduce our data collection as well as the layout of this study. Chapter Two surveys literature on news discourse analysis both at home and abroad, and proposes the future research orientation after a critical analysis of present research findings. We specify this study as an attempt to fulfill the mission to develop an affirmative research agenda in the productive use of discourse and power, through a systemic-functional study of the intersubjective semogenesis of news discourse rhetoric. Chapter Three locates this study on the assumption of language as symbolic action, and proceeds to list our research hypotheses on the systemic-functional rhetoric of semogenesis in and through news discourse. We then sketch the chief theoretic sources this study draws upon as well as the methodology to be employed.
The next four chapters, from Chapter Four to Seven, unfold our research scheme and testify our research hypotheses.
Chapter Four starts by explicating the relationship between context, rhetoric and truth, and investigates how news discourse interacts and develops a nexus with the socio-semiotic context. On the one hand, we investigate how news discourse adapts—in terms of negotiability, adaptability and variability—to socio-cultural context characterized by“pseudo-interaction”and“monologicality”to facilitate its semogenesis. On the other hand, we explore how the process and product of semogenesis constitute an organic interdiscursive and intertextual universe so as to propel the framing of ideology and the generation of the knowledge-value complex.
Chapter Five is devoted to the rhetorical realization of ideational meaning. With the Burkean dramatistic pentad, we analyze how the foregrounded ratios between scene, act, agent, agency and purpose in news discourse develop into different terministic screens, and confine with particular motive and orientation the objectiveness of news discourse to specific socio-cultural context. Taking into account the heterogeneity of discursive motives under divergent rhetorical paradigms, we proceed to probe into polysemy and logomachy in news discourse, so as to study how the intersubjectively constructed meanings develop into stable conceptual frameworks in the form of information which vie for legitimacy of semogenesis and space of circulation in the discursive universe.
Chapter Six connects the rhetorical construction of interpersonal meaning in news discourse with the contemporary research trend in linguistics to emphasize the interpersonal, variable and negotiable meaning, and explores how news discourse pursues objectivity in order to defend its institutional ethos, so that it can maintain and develop ideological identification and consubstantiality through the logogenesis, ontogenesis and phylogenesis of meaning. In particular, we employ the“attribution”concept in the ENGAGEMENT subsystem of the APPRAISAL Theory, with an aim to shed light on how the myth of direct speech is exploited to appraise, take stance, construct textual persona, coordinate interpersonal stances and relations, and establish discursive alliance or division.
Chapter Seven, with informational coherence as the binding concept, is contributed to the rhetorical realization of textual meaning in news discourse from respectively the dimensions of“communication-cognition”and“epistemology-axiology”. On the“communication-cognition”dimension, with informativeness, redundancy and accessibility as major parameters, this chapter studies how news discourse facilitates communicators’swift dissemination of the selected information together with the appraisal meaning attached, while enabling audiences to acquire maximum new information with minimum cognitive efforts. On the“epistemology-axiology”dimension, this chapter challenges linear coherence by contending that the perceived coherence is underpinned with cultural-specific value system, and hence is virtually an“epistemological-axiological”information gestalt. Furthermore, we contend informational coherence as metaphorical, with informational coherence on the“communication-cognition”dimension functioning as a vehicle to identify with the informational coherence on the“epistemology-axiology”dimension as a tenor, so as to establish the myth of coherence in ideological consubstantiation.
Chapter Eight briefly concludes major research findings in this dissertation, and points out the pressing strategic significance for journalistic practitioners, as well as the profound importance for the design and development of future theoretical framework on meaning. Especially, for Chinese journalists and editors alike, this study helps to prepare them for the challenges and opportunities brought by foreign media’s newly-emerging presence in China, enabling them to effectively construct and maintain the ideology of socio-semiotic semantic field. Besides, this study provides feasible theoretical guidance for core curricula in the English-journalism major. Theoretically, the systemic-functional rhetoric presented in this study explicates the intersubjective and rhetorical realization of semogenesis, shedding light on the dialectics between mass-mediated discourse and dominant rhetorical paradigm.
The research creativity in this dissertation is manifest in the following four aspects. To begin with, we explicate how news discourse evaluates through information, and persuades while shaping ideation and epistemology. News discourse is fundamentally a symbolic drama that structures and releases information, serving the dual function of both information-offering and persuasion. The persuasion without argumentation in news discourse constitutes the ultimate rhetoric. Therefore, news discourse, as the“structuring structured structure”, propels the maintenance and updating of the socio-semiotic meaning potential, constructing the cornerstone for dominant rhetorical paradigm while being constrained by the dominant mode of rhetoric.
Furthermore, we construct a“rhetoric-appraisal”semantic-pragmatic model of the intertextual semogenesis in news discourse. Through a detailed analysis of the“rhetoric-appraisal”mechanism in direct speech in news discourse, we not only elevate the present research on appraisal meaning from lexico-grammatical level to textual level, but prove how the dialogue and heteroglossic negotiation in news discourse are relegated to an orchestrated performance in multi-voice-parts with particular appraisal meaning functioning as the conducting baton, so as to realize pragmatic control while enabling semantic cognition.
Besides, we contend that the informational coherence, as the rhetorical realization of textual meaning in news discourse, is metaphorically constructed with coherence on the“communication-cognition”dimension as the vehicle and coherence on the“epistemology-axiology”dimension as the tenor, Moreover, we argue that coherence from the two dimensions are identified to enable news discourse to metaphorically construct the non-linear reality with linear strings of linguistic signs so as to serve the motive of establishing a myth of coherent ideological consubstantiality.
Last but not least, we attempt to develop a systemic-functional rhetoric of semogenesis in and through news discourse. By marrying the Burkean grammar of motives, rhetoric of motives and logology into the Hallidayan systemic-functional framework, our systemic-functional rhetoric emphasizes both ontologically language-as-action and epistemologically language-as-symbolic-system, recognizing both language-in-use and language-as-system. We proceed to stratify this systemic-functional rhetoric by positioning the motive of symbolic identification at its core, which spurs action and powers the permutation and combination of the dramatistic elements in the second layer of dramatistic action, where scene, act, agent, agency and purpose are motivated to develop into ratios shaping the subsequent discursive and semantic configuration. When ratios in action and circulation develop into terministic screens to organize subsequent epistemology, we enter the third layer of the systemic-functional rhetoric, i.e., that of logology, beyond which lies the fourth layer of the unknown, which opens up to a yet-to-be-acquainted universe of possibilities, discoveries and dialogues. In this way, our systemic-functional rhetoric is a nexus of ontology and epistemology, individual cognition and social scenario, discursive acts and linguistic signs, as well as the known and the unknown. As a theoretical framework for the semogenesis across a variety of genres, our systemic-functional rhetoric serves to explicate how semogenesis is enabled through symbolic action, which in turn is actively engaged in the construction of social discursive order and the evolution of cultural scenario.
引文
Allan, Stuart. “News from NowHere: Televisual News Discourse and the Construction of Hegemony.” Approaches to Media Discourse. Ed. Allan Bell and Peter Garrett. Oxford, Mass: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1998. 105-41.
Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. 3rd ed. New York: Dover Publications, 2004. Austin, John L. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1962.
Barker, Christopher, and Dariusz Galasiński. Cultural Studies and Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications, 2001.
Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. Trans. Annette Lavers. London: Hill and Wang, 1957/1967. 20 Dec.2006.
Beaugrande, Robert de. “An Agenda for Text Semantics: Meaning and Parametric Adjustment.” Folia Linguitica 25.1/2(1991): 5-39.
---. “Critical Discourse Analysis from the Perspective of Ecologism: the Discourse of the ‘New Patriotism’ for the ‘New Secrecy’.” Critical Discourse Studies 1.1(2004): 113–45.
Beaugrande, Robert de, and Wolfgang U. Dressler. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman, 1981.
Bell, Allan. The Language of News Media. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1991. ---. “The Discourse Structure of News Stories.” Approaches to Media Discourse. Ed. Allan
Bell and Peter Garrett. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998. 64-104.
Bell, Allan, and Peter Garrett, eds. Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998.
Berelson, Bernard. Content Analysis in Communication Research. New York: The Free Press, 1952.
Berg, David M. “Rhetoric, Reality, and Mass Media.” The Quarterly Journal of Speech 10(1972): 255-63.
Berger, Peter L., and Thomas Luckman. The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Penguin, 1979.
Bitzer, Lloyd F. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1(1968): 1-12.
Booth, Wayne C. “The Revival of Rhetoric.” PMLA 80.2(1965): 8-12.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1991.
Branham, Robert J., and W. Barnett Pearce. “Between Text and Context: Toward a
Rhetoric of Contextual Reconstruction.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 71(1985): 19-36.
Brown, Gillian, and George Yule. Discourse Analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Brummett, Barry. The World and How We Describe It: Rhetorics of Reality, Representation, Simulation. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.
Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: California UP, 1954.
---. The Rhetoric of Religion: Studies in Logology. Boston: Beacon, 1961.
---. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: California UP, 1966.
---. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.
---. “Dramatism.” The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Ed. David L. Sills. Vol. 7. New York: Macmillan, 1968. 445-52.
---. “Dramatism and Logology.” Communication Quarterly 33.2(1985): 89-93.
---. “Kenneth Burke: Words across the Abyss.” 12 Sept. 2006.
Bygrave, Stephen. Kenneth Burke: Rhetoric and Ideology. London: Routledge, 1993.
Caldas-Coulthard, Carmon Rosa. “On Reporting: The Representation of Speech in Factual and Fictional Narratives.” Advances in Written Text Analysis. Ed. Malcolm Coulthard. London: Routledge, 1994. 295-308.
Chai, Gaiying. “English Advertising: A Rhetoric of Identification.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2004.
Chervwitz, Richard A., and Thomas J. Darwin. “Beyond Reductionism in Rhetorical Theories of Meaning.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 27.4(1994): 313-29.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough. Discourse in Late Modernity — Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999.
Clark, H. H., and S. E. Haviland. “Comprehension and the Given-New Contract.” Ed. R. Freddle. Discourse Production and Comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1977. 1-40.
Coe, Richard M. “Beyond Diction: Using Burke to Empower Words, and Wordlings.” Rhetoric Review 11.2(1993): 368-77.
Coulthard, Malcolm. “On Analyzing and Evaluating Written Text.” Advances in Written Text Analysis. Ed. Malcolm Coulthard. London: Routledge, 1994. 1-11.
Comrie, Bernard. Tense. Beijing: Peking UP, 2005.
Connell, Ian, and Adam Miles. “Text, Discourse and Mass Communication.” Discourse and Communication: New Approaches to the Analysis of Mass Media Discourse and
Communication. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1985a. 26-43.
Crusius, Timothy W. “A Case for Kenneth Burke's Dialectic and Rhetoric.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 19(1986): 23-37.
---. “Orality in Kenneth Burke’s Dialectic.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 21.2(1988): 116-30.
Dominey, Peter F. “Aspects of Descriptive, Referential, and Information Structure in Phrasal Semantics: A Construction-Based Model.” Interaction Studies 6.2(2005): 287-310.
Fairclough, Norman. Language and Power. London: Longman, 1989.
---. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992.
---. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold, 1995.
---. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman, 1995.
Fairclough, Norman, Phil Graham, Jay Lemke, and Ruth Wodak. “Introduction.” Critical Discourse Studies 1.1(2004): 1–7.
Farrow, Steve. “The Language Myth Revisited.” Language & Communication 25.1(2005): 19-25.
Fiske, John. Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge, 1982.
Foss, Sonia. K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Waveland P, 1985.
Fowler, Roger. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge, 1991.
---, ed. Essays on Style and Language: Linguistic and Critical Approaches to Literary Style. London: Routledge and K. Paul, 1970.
---. “Power”. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Vol. 4. London: Academic P, 1985. 61-82.
Fowler, R., B. Hodge, G.. Kress, and T. Trew, eds. Language and Control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979.
Fowler, Roger, and Gunther Kress. “Critical Linguistics.” Language and Control. Ed. R.
Fowler, B. Hodge, G. Kress and T. Trew. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979. 185-213.
Fox, Catherine. “Beyond the ‘Tyranny of the Real’: Revisiting Burke’s Pentad as Research Method for Professional Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly 11.4(2002): 365-88.
Gao, Yali. “Research on the Interpersonal Meaning Realization of News Text.” Diss. Northwestern Polytechincal U, 2006.
Garret, Mary, and Xiao Xiaosui. “The Rhetorical Situation Revisited.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 23.2(1993): 30-40.
Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Giora, R. “Discourse Coherence and Theory of Relevance: Stumbling Blocks in Search of a Unified Theory.” Journal of Pragmatics 27(1997): 17-34.
Givón, T. “Prolegomena to Discourse-Pragmatics.” Journal of Pragmatics 8(1984): 489-516.
Goldstein, Norm, ed. The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual. New York: The Associated P, 1995.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: the Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2001.
---. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Halliday, M. A. K., and C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell, 1999.
Halliday, M. A. K., and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2001.
Hassett, Michael. “Sophisticated Burke: Kenneth Burke as a Neosophistic Rhetorician.” Rhetoric Review 13.2(1995): 371-90.
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason. Discourse and the Translator. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2001.
Henderson, Greig, and David Cratis Williams, eds. Unending Conversations: New Writings by and about Kenneth Burke. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2001.
Hillier, Hillary. Analyzing Real Texts: Research Studies in Modern English Language. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
Hodge, Robert, and Gunther Kress. Social Semiotics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell UP, 1988. ---. Language as Ideology. London: Routledge, 1993.
Hoey, Michael. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2000.
Hu, Shuzhong. English Rhetoric. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2002.
Huang, Guowen, and Ghadessy Mohsen. Functional Discourse Analysis. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2006.
Hunston, Susan, and Geoff Thompson, eds. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.
Hyland, Ken. “Academic Attribution: Citation and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge.” Applied Linguistics 20.3(1999): 341-67.
“‘Identification’ as a Key Term in Kenneth Burke's Rhetorical Theory.” 12 Sept. 2006.
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, and Karlyn Kohrs Campbell. The Interplay of Influence: News, Advertising, Politics, and the Mass Media. 5th ed. Beijing: Peking UP, 2004.
Jaworski, Adam, and Nikolas Coupland, eds. The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge, 1999.
Johnson, Fern L. Speaking Culturally: Language Diversity in the United States. California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2000.
Ju, Yumei. “Communication as Action: Discourse Analysis from the Perspective of Burkean New Rhetoric.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2004.
Jung, Euichul. “A Critical Analysis of the News Media’s Framing of the African Aids Crisis in Relation to Intellectual Property Between 2000 and 2001.” Diss. The State U of New Jersey, 2005.
Kecskes, Istvan. “Contextual Meaning and Word Meaning.” Journal of Foreign Languages 5(2006): 18-32.
“Kenneth Burke: Definition of Key Terms and Concepts.” 12 Sept. 2006.
Kepplinger, Hans Mathias, and Gregor Daschmann. “Today’s News — Tomorrow’s Context: A Dynamic Model of News.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 41.4(1997): 548-66.
Kiparsky, Paul. “Event Structure and the Perfect.” The Construction of Meaning. Ed. David I. Beaver, Luis D. Casillas Martinez, Brady Z. Clark and Stefan Kaufmann. CSLI Publications, 2002. 113-35.
K?nig, Thomas. “Frame Analysis: A Primer.” 20 Dec. 2006.
Kress, Gunther. “Ideological Structures in Discourse.” Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Vol. 4. London: Academic Press, Inc. Ltd. 1985. 27-42.
Kress, Gunther, and Robert Hodge. Language as Ideology. London: Routledge & K. Paul, 1979.
Kuo, Sai-Hua. “Reported Speech in Chinese Political Discourse.” Discourse & Society 3.2(2001): 181-202.
Li, C. N. “Direct and Indirect Speech: A Functional Study.” Direct and Indirect Speech. Ed. F. Coulmas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 29–45.
Lule, Jack. “News Language and the Study of International Reporting.” Journalism Education Winter(1992): 66-72.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. “The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages.” The Meaning of Meaning. C. K. Ogden, and I. A. Richards. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1923/1985. 296-336.
Mann, W. C., and S. A. Thompson. “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization.” Text 8.3(1988): 243-81.
Martin, J. R. “Modelling Context: A Crooked Path of Progress in Contextual Linguistics.” Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Ed. Mohsen Ghadessy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 1999. 25-61.
---. “Introduction.” Text 23.2(2003): 171-81.
---. “Mourning: How We Get Aligned.” Discourse & Society 15.2/3(2004): 321–44.
Martin, J. R., and David Rose. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. London: Continuum, 2003.
Martin, J. R., and P. R. R. White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Mencher, Melvin. News Reporting and Writing. 9th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Pan, Zhongdang, and Gerald M. Kosicki. “Framing Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse.” Political Communication 10(1993): 55-75.
Phillips, Nelson, and Cynthia Hardy. Discourse Analysis: Investigating Processes of Social Construction. California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2002.
Putnam, Hilary. Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1981.
---. Representation and Reality. Cambridge, Mass: MIT P, 1988.
Richards, I. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: OUP, 1936.
Rothery, J. “An Introductory Tour through Appraisal Theory.” 15 Oct. 2005.
Schiffrin, Deborah. Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, 1994.
Scollon, Ron. Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction: A Study of News Discourse. London: Longman, 1998.
Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne Wong Scollon. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 1995.
Shi, Xu. A Cultural Approach to Discourse. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Simpson, Paul. “The Transitivity Model.” Review and Criticism 6(1988): 166-72.
Slembrouck, Stef. “What Is Meant by ‘Discourse Analysis’.” 12 Oct. 2005.
Smit, David W. “The Rhetorical Method of Ludwig Wittgenstein.” Rhetoric Review 10.1(1991): 31-51.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986.
Stempel III, Guido H. “Content Analysis.” Research Methods in Mass Communication. Ed. Guido H. Stempel III and Bruce H. Westley. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 124-36.
Stillar, Glenn F. Analyzing Everyday Texts: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998.
Stubbs, Michael. Discourse Analysis — the Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Blackwell, 1983.
Talbot, Mary, Karen Atkinson, and David Atkinson. Language and Power in the Modern World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2003.
Tannen, D. “Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative.” Direct and Indirect Speech. Ed. F. Coulmas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 311–32.
Thompson, Gary. Rhetoric through Media. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1997.
Thompson, Geoff. Reporting. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press Ltd., 1994.
---. Introducing Functional Grammar. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.
Thompson, Geoff, and Ye Yiyun. “Evaluation in the Reporting Verbs Used in Academic Papers.” Applied Linguistics 12.4(1991): 365-82.
Tuchman, Gage. Making News. New York: The Free Press, 1978.
van Dijk, Teun A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantic and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman, 1977.
---. Discourse and Communication: New Approaches to the Analysis of Mass Media Discourse and Communication. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1985a.
---, ed. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Harcourt, 1985b.
---. News as Discourse. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988a.
---. News Analysis: Case Studies of International and National News in the Press. Hove: Hillsdale, 1988b.
---. “Media Contents: the Interdisciplinary Study of News as Discourse.” Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. Ed. K. B. Jensen and N. W. Jankowski. London: Routledge, 1991. 108-19.
Verschueren, Jef. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Volo?inov, V. N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. London: Harvard UP, 1986.
Wang, Yang. “Transitivity and Critical Discourse Analysis of News Texts.” Diss. Northeast Normal U, 2003.
Wang, Zhenhua. “Engagement in Interaction: An APPRAISAL Perspective.” Diss. Henan U, 2003.
Weiss, Gilbert, and Ruth Wodak, eds. Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Wess, Robert. “Pentadic Terms and Master Tropes: Ontology of the Act and Epistemology of the Trope in A Grammar of Motives.” Unending Conversations: New Writings by and about Kenneth Burke. Ed. Greig Henderson and David Cratis Williams. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2001. 154-75.
White, P. R. R. “Telling Media Tales: The News Story as Rhetoric.” Diss. U of Sydney, 1998.
Wittebols, James. “Words and Worlds of Terror: Context and Meaning of a Media Buzzword.” Et cetera Fall(1991): 336-42.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Trans. G. E. M. Anscombe. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1958.
Wodak, Ruth, ed. Language, Power, and Ideology: Studies in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub. Co., 1989.
Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, and Karin Liebhart, eds. The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Trans. Angelika Hirsch and Richard Mitten. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999.
Wolin, Ross. The Rhetorical Imagination of Kenneth Burke. Columbia, SC: U of South Carolina P, 2001.
Wu, Xueyin. “Studies in the Rhetoric of English News Texts.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2005.
Xin, Bin. Intertextuality from a Critical Perspective. Suzhou: Suzhou UP, 2000.
Young, Lynne, and Claire Harrison, eds. Systemic Functional linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change. London: Continuum, 2004.
陈意德(Chen, Yide). 及物性理论与英语新闻语篇的批评分析. 佳木斯大学社会科学学报, 2003, (6): 113-14.
陈中竺(Chen, Zhongzhu). 批评语言学述评. 外语教学与研究, 1995, (1): 21-27.
程锡麟(Cheng, Xiling). 互文性理论概述. 外国文学, 1996, (1): 72-78.
丁和根(Ding, Hegen). 梵·迪克新闻话语结构理论述评. 江苏社会科学, 2003, (6): 199-203.
范红(Fan, Hong). 报刊新闻语篇及其宏观、微观结构. 清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版) , 2002, (1): 34-38.
鞠玉梅(Ju, Yumei). 从西方修辞学的新理论看修辞学的发展趋势. 四川外国语学院学报, 2003, (1): 63-66.
[法]海然热(Hagège, Claude) 著. 语言人:论语言学对人文科学的贡献. 张祖建(Zhang, Zujian) 译. 北京:生活?读书?新知 三联书店, 1999.
胡曙中(Hu, Shuzhong). 英汉修辞比较研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1993.
——. 美国新修辞学研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1999.
胡正强(Hu, Zhengqiang). 新闻直接引语可以改动吗. 新闻大学 2004, (11): 48-49.
胡壮麟(Hu, Zhuanglin). 语篇的衔接与连贯. 上海:上海外语教育出版社,2003.
胡壮麟(Hu, Zhuanglin),朱永生(Zhu, Yongsheng),张德录(Zhang, Delu). 系统功能语法概论. 邵阳:湖南教育出版社, 1989.
黄敏(Huang, Min). “新闻作为话语”——新闻报道话语分析的一个实例. 新闻大学, 2004, (1): 27-34.
[美] 肯尼斯?博克 等 (Burke, Kenneth et al.) . 当代西方修辞学: 演讲与话语批评.
常昌富(Chang, Changfu),顾宝桐(Gu, Baotong) 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1998.
李彬(Li, Bin). 符号透视:传播内容的本体诠释. 上海: 复旦大学出版社,2003.
李曙光(Li, Shuguang). 新闻语篇对话性初探——情态语言资源视角. 外语与外语教学, 2006, (6): 60-63.
李元授(Li, Yuanshou),白丁(Bai, Ding). 新闻语言学. 北京:新华出版社,2001.
李战子(Li, Zhanzi). 话语的人际意义研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社,2002.
林晓飞(Lin, Xiaofei). 新闻话语的修辞学研究. 山东大学硕士学位论文,2006.
罗远林(Luo, Yuanlin). 新闻修辞研究. 大连: 辽宁师范大学出版社,1994.
马景秀(Ma, Jingxiu). 探究人际意义与我国对外报道语篇的建构. 上海师范大学学报(社科版), 2005, (7): 18-21.
——. 协商与抵抗:文化身份视角的新闻编译策略. 上海理工大学学报(社科版), 2006, (1): 47-50.
——. 术语规范与新闻话语的修辞建构. 天津外国语学院学报, 2007, (3): 31-36.
——. 新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制. 国外外语教学, (已录用).
苗东升(Miao, Dongsheng). 系统科学精要. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2006.
苗兴伟(Miao, Xingwei). 语篇的信息连贯. 外语教学, 2003, (2): 13-16.
钱冠连(Qian, Guanlian). 语言哲学修辞论的一种猜想. 福建师范大学学报,2003, (6): 20-24.
谭学纯(Tan, Xuechun), 唐跃(Tang, Yue), 朱玲(Zhu, Ling). 接受修辞学. 合肥: 安徽大学出版社,2000.
吴东英(Wu, Dongying),冯捷蕴(Feng, Jieyun),卢志鸿(Lu, Zhihong),陈瑞端(Chen, Duanrui),姚喜双(Yao, Xishuang). 国内外媒体语言研究的回顾和展望. 媒体语言大家谈. 姚喜双(Yao, Xishuang), 郭龙生(Guo, Longsheng) 主编. 北京: 经济科学出版社,2004:344-61.
肖小穗(Xiao, Xiaosui). 传媒批评:揭开公开中立的面纱. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江人民出版社, 2002.
辛斌(Xin, Bin). 新闻语篇转述引语的批评性分析. 外语教学与研究, 1998, (2): 9-14.
——. 批评语言学与英语新闻语篇的批评性分析. 外语教学, 2000, (4): 44-48.
——. 批评语言学: 理论与应用. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 2005.
——. 《中国日报》和《纽约时报》中转述方式和消息来源的比较分析. 外语与外语教学, 2006, (3): 1-4.
徐盛桓(Xu, Shenghuan). 信息状态研究. 现代外语, 1996, (2): 5-12.
许余龙(Xu, Yulong). 英汉指称词语表达的可及性. 外语教学与研究, 2000, (5): 321-28.
杨雪燕(Yang, Xueyan). 社论英语的文体研究. 外语教学与研究, 2001, (5): 367-73.
袁影(Yuan, Ying). 西方现当代修辞认知观探研. 修辞学习, 2005, (2): 5-9.
[美]约翰?费斯克(Fiske, John) 传播符号学理论. 张锦华(Zhang, Jinhua) 等 译. 台北:远流出版公司, 1995.
曾庆香(Zeng, Qingxiang). 试论新闻话语. 中国社会科学院博士学位论文, 2003.
——. 新闻叙事学. 北京: 中国广播电视出版社, 2005.
[美] 詹姆斯?昂特?奥奈(Aune, James Arnt). 超越解构:象征与社会现实. 当代西方修辞学: 演讲与话语批评. 肯尼斯?博克 等 (Burke, Kenneth et al.) 著. 常昌富(Chang, Changfu), 顾宝桐(Gu, Baotong) 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1998. 299-314.
张健(Zhang, Jian). 新闻英语文体与范文评析. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1994/2004.
张宗正(Zhang, Zongzheng). 理论修辞学:宏观视野下的大修辞学. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2004.
朱永生(Zhu, Yongsheng). 语境的动态研究. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2005.
Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. 3rd ed. New York: Dover Publications, 2004. Austin, John L. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1962.
Barker, Christopher, and Dariusz Galasiński. Cultural Studies and Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications, 2001.
Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. Trans. Annette Lavers. London: Hill and Wang, 1957/1967. 20 Dec.2006
Beaugrande, Robert de. “An Agenda for Text Semantics: Meaning and Parametric Adjustment.” Folia Linguitica 25.1/2(1991): 5-39.
---. “Critical Discourse Analysis from the Perspective of Ecologism: the Discourse of the ‘New Patriotism’ for the ‘New Secrecy’.” Critical Discourse Studies 1.1(2004): 113–45.
Beaugrande, Robert de, and Wolfgang U. Dressler. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman, 1981.
Bell, Allan. The Language of News Media. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1991. ---. “The Discourse Structure of News Stories.” Approaches to Media Discourse. Ed. Allan
Bell and Peter Garrett. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998. 64-104.
Bell, Allan, and Peter Garrett, eds. Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998.
Berelson, Bernard. Content Analysis in Communication Research. New York: The Free Press, 1952.
Berg, David M. “Rhetoric, Reality, and Mass Media.” The Quarterly Journal of Speech 10(1972): 255-63.
Berger, Peter L., and Thomas Luckman. The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Penguin, 1979.
Bitzer, Lloyd F. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1(1968): 1-12.
Booth, Wayne C. “The Revival of Rhetoric.” PMLA 80.2(1965): 8-12.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1991.
Branham, Robert J., and W. Barnett Pearce. “Between Text and Context: Toward a
Rhetoric of Contextual Reconstruction.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 71(1985): 19-36.
Brown, Gillian, and George Yule. Discourse Analysis. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Brummett, Barry. The World and How We Describe It: Rhetorics of Reality, Representation, Simulation. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003.
Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: California UP, 1954.
---. The Rhetoric of Religion: Studies in Logology. Boston: Beacon, 1961.
---. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley: California UP, 1966.
---. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.
---. “Dramatism.” The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Ed. David L. Sills. Vol. 7. New York: Macmillan, 1968. 445-52.
---. “Dramatism and Logology.” Communication Quarterly 33.2(1985): 89-93.
---. “Kenneth Burke: Words across the Abyss.” 12 Sept. 2006
Bygrave, Stephen. Kenneth Burke: Rhetoric and Ideology. London: Routledge, 1993.
Caldas-Coulthard, Carmon Rosa. “On Reporting: The Representation of Speech in Factual and Fictional Narratives.” Advances in Written Text Analysis. Ed. Malcolm Coulthard. London: Routledge, 1994. 295-308.
Chai, Gaiying. “English Advertising: A Rhetoric of Identification.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2004.
Chervwitz, Richard A., and Thomas J. Darwin. “Beyond Reductionism in Rhetorical Theories of Meaning.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 27.4(1994): 313-29.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough. Discourse in Late Modernity — Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999.
Clark, H. H., and S. E. Haviland. “Comprehension and the Given-New Contract.” Ed. R. Freddle. Discourse Production and Comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1977. 1-40.
Coe, Richard M. “Beyond Diction: Using Burke to Empower Words, and Wordlings.” Rhetoric Review 11.2(1993): 368-77.
Coulthard, Malcolm. “On Analyzing and Evaluating Written Text.” Advances in Written Text Analysis. Ed. Malcolm Coulthard. London: Routledge, 1994. 1-11.
Comrie, Bernard. Tense. Beijing: Peking UP, 2005.
Connell, Ian, and Adam Miles. “Text, Discourse and Mass Communication.” Discourse and Communication: New Approaches to the Analysis of Mass Media Discourse and
Communication. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1985a. 26-43.
Crusius, Timothy W. “A Case for Kenneth Burke's Dialectic and Rhetoric.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 19(1986): 23-37.
---. “Orality in Kenneth Burke’s Dialectic.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 21.2(1988): 116-30.
Dominey, Peter F. “Aspects of Descriptive, Referential, and Information Structure in Phrasal Semantics: A Construction-Based Model.” Interaction Studies 6.2(2005): 287-310.
Fairclough, Norman. Language and Power. London: Longman, 1989.
---. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992.
---. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold, 1995.
---. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman, 1995.
Fairclough, Norman, Phil Graham, Jay Lemke, and Ruth Wodak. “Introduction.” Critical Discourse Studies 1.1(2004): 1–7.
Farrow, Steve. “The Language Myth Revisited.” Language & Communication 25.1(2005): 19-25.
Fiske, John. Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge, 1982.
Foss, Sonia. K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Waveland P, 1985.
Fowler, Roger. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge, 1991.
---, ed. Essays on Style and Language: Linguistic and Critical Approaches to Literary Style. London: Routledge and K. Paul, 1970.
---. “Power”. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Vol. 4. London: Academic P, 1985. 61-82.
Fowler, R., B. Hodge, G.. Kress, and T. Trew, eds. Language and Control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979.
Fowler, Roger, and Gunther Kress. “Critical Linguistics.” Language and Control. Ed. R.
Fowler, B. Hodge, G. Kress and T. Trew. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979. 185-213.
Fox, Catherine. “Beyond the ‘Tyranny of the Real’: Revisiting Burke’s Pentad as Research Method for Professional Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly 11.4(2002): 365-88.
Gao, Yali. “Research on the Interpersonal Meaning Realization of News Text.” Diss. Northwestern Polytechincal U, 2006.
Garret, Mary, and Xiao Xiaosui. “The Rhetorical Situation Revisited.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly 23.2(1993): 30-40.
Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Giora, R. “Discourse Coherence and Theory of Relevance: Stumbling Blocks in Search of a Unified Theory.” Journal of Pragmatics 27(1997): 17-34.
Givón, T. “Prolegomena to Discourse-Pragmatics.” Journal of Pragmatics 8(1984): 489-516.
Goldstein, Norm, ed. The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual. New York: The Associated P, 1995.
Halliday, M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: the Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2001.
---. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Halliday, M. A. K., and C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell, 1999.
Halliday, M. A. K., and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2001.
Hassett, Michael. “Sophisticated Burke: Kenneth Burke as a Neosophistic Rhetorician.” Rhetoric Review 13.2(1995): 371-90.
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason. Discourse and the Translator. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2001.
Henderson, Greig, and David Cratis Williams, eds. Unending Conversations: New Writings by and about Kenneth Burke. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2001.
Hillier, Hillary. Analyzing Real Texts: Research Studies in Modern English Language. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
Hodge, Robert, and Gunther Kress. Social Semiotics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell UP, 1988. ---. Language as Ideology. London: Routledge, 1993.
Hoey, Michael. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2000.
Hu, Shuzhong. English Rhetoric. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2002.
Huang, Guowen, and Ghadessy Mohsen. Functional Discourse Analysis. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education P, 2006.
Hunston, Susan, and Geoff Thompson, eds. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.
Hyland, Ken. “Academic Attribution: Citation and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge.” Applied Linguistics 20.3(1999): 341-67.
“‘Identification’ as a Key Term in Kenneth Burke's Rhetorical Theory.” 12 Sept. 2006
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, and Karlyn Kohrs Campbell. The Interplay of Influence: News, Advertising, Politics, and the Mass Media. 5th ed. Beijing: Peking UP, 2004.
Jaworski, Adam, and Nikolas Coupland, eds. The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge, 1999.
Johnson, Fern L. Speaking Culturally: Language Diversity in the United States. California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2000.
Ju, Yumei. “Communication as Action: Discourse Analysis from the Perspective of Burkean New Rhetoric.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2004.
Jung, Euichul. “A Critical Analysis of the News Media’s Framing of the African Aids Crisis in Relation to Intellectual Property Between 2000 and 2001.” Diss. The State U of New Jersey, 2005.
Kecskes, Istvan. “Contextual Meaning and Word Meaning.” Journal of Foreign Languages 5(2006): 18-32.
“Kenneth Burke: Definition of Key Terms and Concepts.” 12 Sept. 2006
Kepplinger, Hans Mathias, and Gregor Daschmann. “Today’s News — Tomorrow’s Context: A Dynamic Model of News.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 41.4(1997): 548-66.
Kiparsky, Paul. “Event Structure and the Perfect.” The Construction of Meaning. Ed. David I. Beaver, Luis D. Casillas Martinez, Brady Z. Clark and Stefan Kaufmann. CSLI Publications, 2002. 113-35.
K?nig, Thomas. “Frame Analysis: A Primer.” 20 Dec. 2006
Kress, Gunther. “Ideological Structures in Discourse.” Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. Vol. 4. London: Academic Press, Inc. Ltd. 1985. 27-42.
Kress, Gunther, and Robert Hodge. Language as Ideology. London: Routledge & K. Paul, 1979.
Kuo, Sai-Hua. “Reported Speech in Chinese Political Discourse.” Discourse & Society 3.2(2001): 181-202.
Li, C. N. “Direct and Indirect Speech: A Functional Study.” Direct and Indirect Speech. Ed. F. Coulmas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 29–45.
Lule, Jack. “News Language and the Study of International Reporting.” Journalism Education Winter(1992): 66-72.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. “The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages.” The Meaning of Meaning. C. K. Ogden, and I. A. Richards. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1923/1985. 296-336.
Mann, W. C., and S. A. Thompson. “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization.” Text 8.3(1988): 243-81.
Martin, J. R. “Modelling Context: A Crooked Path of Progress in Contextual Linguistics.” Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Ed. Mohsen Ghadessy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 1999. 25-61.
---. “Introduction.” Text 23.2(2003): 171-81.
---. “Mourning: How We Get Aligned.” Discourse & Society 15.2/3(2004): 321–44.
Martin, J. R., and David Rose. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. London: Continuum, 2003.
Martin, J. R., and P. R. R. White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Mencher, Melvin. News Reporting and Writing. 9th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Pan, Zhongdang, and Gerald M. Kosicki. “Framing Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse.” Political Communication 10(1993): 55-75.
Phillips, Nelson, and Cynthia Hardy. Discourse Analysis: Investigating Processes of Social Construction. California: Sage Publications, Inc., 2002.
Putnam, Hilary. Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1981.
---. Representation and Reality. Cambridge, Mass: MIT P, 1988.
Richards, I. A. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: OUP, 1936.
Rothery, J. “An Introductory Tour through Appraisal Theory.” 15 Oct. 2005
Schiffrin, Deborah. Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, 1994.
Scollon, Ron. Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction: A Study of News Discourse. London: Longman, 1998.
Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne Wong Scollon. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 1995.
Shi, Xu. A Cultural Approach to Discourse. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Simpson, Paul. “The Transitivity Model.” Review and Criticism 6(1988): 166-72.
Slembrouck, Stef. “What Is Meant by ‘Discourse Analysis’.” 12 Oct. 2005
Smit, David W. “The Rhetorical Method of Ludwig Wittgenstein.” Rhetoric Review 10.1(1991): 31-51.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1986.
Stempel III, Guido H. “Content Analysis.” Research Methods in Mass Communication. Ed. Guido H. Stempel III and Bruce H. Westley. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 124-36.
Stillar, Glenn F. Analyzing Everyday Texts: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998.
Stubbs, Michael. Discourse Analysis — the Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Blackwell, 1983.
Talbot, Mary, Karen Atkinson, and David Atkinson. Language and Power in the Modern World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2003.
Tannen, D. “Introducing Constructed Dialogue in Greek and American Conversational and Literary Narrative.” Direct and Indirect Speech. Ed. F. Coulmas. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 311–32.
Thompson, Gary. Rhetoric through Media. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1997.
Thompson, Geoff. Reporting. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press Ltd., 1994.
---. Introducing Functional Grammar. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2000.
Thompson, Geoff, and Ye Yiyun. “Evaluation in the Reporting Verbs Used in Academic Papers.” Applied Linguistics 12.4(1991): 365-82.
Tuchman, Gage. Making News. New York: The Free Press, 1978.
van Dijk, Teun A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantic and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman, 1977.
---. Discourse and Communication: New Approaches to the Analysis of Mass Media Discourse and Communication. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1985a.
---, ed. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Harcourt, 1985b.
---. News as Discourse. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988a.
---. News Analysis: Case Studies of International and National News in the Press. Hove: Hillsdale, 1988b.
---. “Media Contents: the Interdisciplinary Study of News as Discourse.” Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. Ed. K. B. Jensen and N. W. Jankowski. London: Routledge, 1991. 108-19.
Verschueren, Jef. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research P, 2000.
Volo?inov, V. N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. London: Harvard UP, 1986.
Wang, Yang. “Transitivity and Critical Discourse Analysis of News Texts.” Diss. Northeast Normal U, 2003.
Wang, Zhenhua. “Engagement in Interaction: An APPRAISAL Perspective.” Diss. Henan U, 2003.
Weiss, Gilbert, and Ruth Wodak, eds. Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Wess, Robert. “Pentadic Terms and Master Tropes: Ontology of the Act and Epistemology of the Trope in A Grammar of Motives.” Unending Conversations: New Writings by and about Kenneth Burke. Ed. Greig Henderson and David Cratis Williams. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2001. 154-75.
White, P. R. R. “Telling Media Tales: The News Story as Rhetoric.” Diss. U of Sydney, 1998.
Wittebols, James. “Words and Worlds of Terror: Context and Meaning of a Media Buzzword.” Et cetera Fall(1991): 336-42.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Trans. G. E. M. Anscombe. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1958.
Wodak, Ruth, ed. Language, Power, and Ideology: Studies in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub. Co., 1989.
Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, and Karin Liebhart, eds. The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Trans. Angelika Hirsch and Richard Mitten. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999.
Wolin, Ross. The Rhetorical Imagination of Kenneth Burke. Columbia, SC: U of South Carolina P, 2001.
Wu, Xueyin. “Studies in the Rhetoric of English News Texts.” Diss. Shanghai International Studies U, 2005.
Xin, Bin. Intertextuality from a Critical Perspective. Suzhou: Suzhou UP, 2000.
Young, Lynne, and Claire Harrison, eds. Systemic Functional linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change. London: Continuum, 2004.
陈意德(Chen, Yide). 及物性理论与英语新闻语篇的批评分析. 佳木斯大学社会科学学报, 2003, (6): 113-14.
陈中竺(Chen, Zhongzhu). 批评语言学述评. 外语教学与研究, 1995, (1): 21-27.
程锡麟(Cheng, Xiling). 互文性理论概述. 外国文学, 1996, (1): 72-78.
丁和根(Ding, Hegen). 梵·迪克新闻话语结构理论述评. 江苏社会科学, 2003, (6): 199-203.
范红(Fan, Hong). 报刊新闻语篇及其宏观、微观结构. 清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版) , 2002, (1): 34-38.
鞠玉梅(Ju, Yumei). 从西方修辞学的新理论看修辞学的发展趋势. 四川外国语学院学报, 2003, (1): 63-66.
[法]海然热(Hagège, Claude) 著. 语言人:论语言学对人文科学的贡献. 张祖建(Zhang, Zujian) 译. 北京:生活?读书?新知 三联书店, 1999.
胡曙中(Hu, Shuzhong). 英汉修辞比较研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1993.
——. 美国新修辞学研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1999.
胡正强(Hu, Zhengqiang). 新闻直接引语可以改动吗. 新闻大学 2004, (11): 48-49.
胡壮麟(Hu, Zhuanglin). 语篇的衔接与连贯. 上海:上海外语教育出版社,2003.
胡壮麟(Hu, Zhuanglin),朱永生(Zhu, Yongsheng),张德录(Zhang, Delu). 系统功能语法概论. 邵阳:湖南教育出版社, 1989.
黄敏(Huang, Min). “新闻作为话语”——新闻报道话语分析的一个实例. 新闻大学, 2004, (1): 27-34.
[美] 肯尼斯?博克 等 (Burke, Kenneth et al.) . 当代西方修辞学: 演讲与话语批评.
常昌富(Chang, Changfu),顾宝桐(Gu, Baotong) 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1998.
李彬(Li, Bin). 符号透视:传播内容的本体诠释. 上海: 复旦大学出版社,2003.
李曙光(Li, Shuguang). 新闻语篇对话性初探——情态语言资源视角. 外语与外语教学, 2006, (6): 60-63.
李元授(Li, Yuanshou),白丁(Bai, Ding). 新闻语言学. 北京:新华出版社,2001.
李战子(Li, Zhanzi). 话语的人际意义研究. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社,2002.
林晓飞(Lin, Xiaofei). 新闻话语的修辞学研究. 山东大学硕士学位论文,2006.
罗远林(Luo, Yuanlin). 新闻修辞研究. 大连: 辽宁师范大学出版社,1994.
马景秀(Ma, Jingxiu). 探究人际意义与我国对外报道语篇的建构. 上海师范大学学报(社科版), 2005, (7): 18-21.
——. 协商与抵抗:文化身份视角的新闻编译策略. 上海理工大学学报(社科版), 2006, (1): 47-50.
——. 术语规范与新闻话语的修辞建构. 天津外国语学院学报, 2007, (3): 31-36.
——. 新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制. 国外外语教学, (已录用).
苗东升(Miao, Dongsheng). 系统科学精要. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2006.
苗兴伟(Miao, Xingwei). 语篇的信息连贯. 外语教学, 2003, (2): 13-16.
钱冠连(Qian, Guanlian). 语言哲学修辞论的一种猜想. 福建师范大学学报,2003, (6): 20-24.
谭学纯(Tan, Xuechun), 唐跃(Tang, Yue), 朱玲(Zhu, Ling). 接受修辞学. 合肥: 安徽大学出版社,2000.
吴东英(Wu, Dongying),冯捷蕴(Feng, Jieyun),卢志鸿(Lu, Zhihong),陈瑞端(Chen, Duanrui),姚喜双(Yao, Xishuang). 国内外媒体语言研究的回顾和展望. 媒体语言大家谈. 姚喜双(Yao, Xishuang), 郭龙生(Guo, Longsheng) 主编. 北京: 经济科学出版社,2004:344-61.
肖小穗(Xiao, Xiaosui). 传媒批评:揭开公开中立的面纱. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江人民出版社, 2002.
辛斌(Xin, Bin). 新闻语篇转述引语的批评性分析. 外语教学与研究, 1998, (2): 9-14.
——. 批评语言学与英语新闻语篇的批评性分析. 外语教学, 2000, (4): 44-48.
——. 批评语言学: 理论与应用. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 2005.
——. 《中国日报》和《纽约时报》中转述方式和消息来源的比较分析. 外语与外语教学, 2006, (3): 1-4.
徐盛桓(Xu, Shenghuan). 信息状态研究. 现代外语, 1996, (2): 5-12.
许余龙(Xu, Yulong). 英汉指称词语表达的可及性. 外语教学与研究, 2000, (5): 321-28.
杨雪燕(Yang, Xueyan). 社论英语的文体研究. 外语教学与研究, 2001, (5): 367-73.
袁影(Yuan, Ying). 西方现当代修辞认知观探研. 修辞学习, 2005, (2): 5-9.
[美]约翰?费斯克(Fiske, John) 传播符号学理论. 张锦华(Zhang, Jinhua) 等 译. 台北:远流出版公司, 1995.
曾庆香(Zeng, Qingxiang). 试论新闻话语. 中国社会科学院博士学位论文, 2003.
——. 新闻叙事学. 北京: 中国广播电视出版社, 2005.
[美] 詹姆斯?昂特?奥奈(Aune, James Arnt). 超越解构:象征与社会现实. 当代西方修辞学: 演讲与话语批评. 肯尼斯?博克 等 (Burke, Kenneth et al.) 著. 常昌富(Chang, Changfu), 顾宝桐(Gu, Baotong) 译. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 1998. 299-314.
张健(Zhang, Jian). 新闻英语文体与范文评析. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 1994/2004.
张宗正(Zhang, Zongzheng). 理论修辞学:宏观视野下的大修辞学. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社, 2004.
朱永生(Zhu, Yongsheng). 语境的动态研究. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2005.