科学修辞学研究
摘要
本论文由导言、四章系统性论述和结束语组成。
在导言部分，论文首先简要考察了国内外科学修辞学的基本研究状况和视角，提出了进行科学修辞学研究必须注意的几个关键概念和必须思考的一些重要问题，在此基础上叙述了本篇博士论文写作的基本思路和主要观点，说明了进行科学修辞学研究的理论意义和价值。
在第一章，论文立足于20世纪人类哲学理智发展的背景和趋势，探讨了科学修辞学形成的理论基础。西方的修辞学先后经历了传统修辞学、近代修辞学和现代修辞学的发展阶段，西方的科学哲学也呈现出“语言学转向”、“解释学转向”和“修辞学转向”的演进轨迹，正是现代修辞学朝向科学的转向和科学哲学朝向修辞学的转向共同促成了科学修辞学的诞生。
在第二章，从科学修辞学的操作域面入手，具体分析了修辞学理论和方法在科学事业中的独特作用。科学概念、科学理论、科学事实的发现离不开隐喻、类比、模型等修辞方法，科学实验、科学论文、科学社会必然需要修辞学的建构，而对科学事实、科学理论、科学信念、科学利益等方面争论的解决也要依靠修辞学的参与。
在第三章，论文主要探讨了科学修辞学与“解释学转向”、后现代主义、科学社会学之间的思想交流和理论关联。科学修辞学不仅具有鲜明的解释学特征，也是对解释学难题的解答、对解释循环的超越和解释实践的修正。科学修辞学是对传统“等级”、“中心”和“意义”的否定，也是对后现代主义解构论、整体论和多元论某些趋向性特征的体现。科学修辞学是对规范主义、历史主义和建构主义科学社会学的修正，也是对一种“科学的社会修辞学”的倡导。
在第四章，从认识论、方法论的层面以及更为综合广阔的哲学层面，展示了科学修辞学的理论意义。在对传统认识论进行批判和重建、产生逻辑性、社会性和推理性知识的过程中，科学修辞学确立了自身的认识论地位。在建构科学语言、解答科学难题、形成科学共同体的过程中，科学修辞学体现了自身的方法论特征。在借鉴哲学转向成果、改造哲学传统理性、优化哲学理论文本的过程中，科学修辞学拥有了哲学上的合法性。
在结束语部分，论文在对科学修辞学的研究意义和发展前景给予积极评价的基础上，提出科学修辞学研究需要进一步思考和解决的一些理论问题，以及科学修辞学的一些缺陷和不足之处，进而描绘出科学修辞学在未来的调整策略和发展趋向。
This thesis consists of a preface , four systematic discussions and a concluding remarks.
In the preface , I first narrate briefly the domestic and overseas research condition about the rhetoric of science , advance some key concepts and some important questions in the research of rhetoric of science. Then I narrate the basic train of thought and main point of view in writing this theis , illustrate the theoretical meaning and value of research of rhetoric of science.
In the first part of this thesis , on the base of the developing background and trend of human being's philosophy and intellect in 20's century , I inquire into the theory foundation of the rhetoric of science . In my opinion , western rhetoric has passed three stages that including traditional rhetoric , modern rhetoric and contemporary rhetoric , western philosophy of science also appears a gradual progress that including "the linguistic turn" , "the hermeneutic turn" and "the rhetoric turn" . I think , contemparory rhetoric's turn toward science and philosophy of science's turn toward rhetoric help to bring about the rhetoric of science.
In the second part of this thesis , from the perspective of the rhetoric of science's theoretical territory , I analyze the rhetorical theory and method's effect in the science enterprise .1 think , the discovery of science concepts ,science theories and science facts can't be separated from rhetorical method such as metaphor , analogy and model , scientific experiment , scientific thesis and science society must need the rhetorical construction , the solution to those quarrels about scientific facts , scientific theories , scientific beliefs , scientific benefits need the rhetoric's paticipation , too.
In the third part of this thesis , I mainly discuss the thought communication and theory relation between the rhetoric of science and "the hermeneutic turn" , the rhetoric of science and the postmodernism , the rhetoric of science and the sociology of science . I think , the rhetoric of science not only has the distinct characteristic of the hermeneutics , but also is the answer to the hermeneutic questions , the transcendence over the hermeneutics circle and the correction to hermeneutic practice .The rhetoric of science is the denying of traditional "degree" , "center" and "meaning" , it also the manifest of the postmodern deconstructionalism , holism and pluralism . The rhetoric of science is the reformation of the normative sociology of science , the paradigmatic sociology and constructive sociology , it also is the
initiation of "the social rhetoric of science" .
In the fourth part of this thesis , from the angle of epistemology , methodology and from the more broad and comprehensive angle of philosophy , I reveal the theoretical meaning of the rhetoric of science . I think , through the criticize and reconstructing of traditional epistemology and producing logical knowledge , social knowledge and theoretical knowledge , the rhetoric of science establish its epistemological position . Through the construction of science language , solving to the science problems and the creation of science community , the rhetoric of science manifest its methodological characteristic . Through drawing lesson from philosophy turn , reforming traditional philosophy reason and optimizing philosophy theory and text, the rhetoric of science possess the legal status in philosophy .
In the concluding remarks , after a positive evaluation of the significance and prospect of the study of rhetoric of science , I put forward some theoretical questions that need to further think and solve in the study of rhetoric of science , some defects and insufficiency of rhetoric of science . In final , I describe the revising tactics and developing trend of the rhetoric of science in the future .
在导言部分，论文首先简要考察了国内外科学修辞学的基本研究状况和视角，提出了进行科学修辞学研究必须注意的几个关键概念和必须思考的一些重要问题，在此基础上叙述了本篇博士论文写作的基本思路和主要观点，说明了进行科学修辞学研究的理论意义和价值。
在第一章，论文立足于20世纪人类哲学理智发展的背景和趋势，探讨了科学修辞学形成的理论基础。西方的修辞学先后经历了传统修辞学、近代修辞学和现代修辞学的发展阶段，西方的科学哲学也呈现出“语言学转向”、“解释学转向”和“修辞学转向”的演进轨迹，正是现代修辞学朝向科学的转向和科学哲学朝向修辞学的转向共同促成了科学修辞学的诞生。
在第二章，从科学修辞学的操作域面入手，具体分析了修辞学理论和方法在科学事业中的独特作用。科学概念、科学理论、科学事实的发现离不开隐喻、类比、模型等修辞方法，科学实验、科学论文、科学社会必然需要修辞学的建构，而对科学事实、科学理论、科学信念、科学利益等方面争论的解决也要依靠修辞学的参与。
在第三章，论文主要探讨了科学修辞学与“解释学转向”、后现代主义、科学社会学之间的思想交流和理论关联。科学修辞学不仅具有鲜明的解释学特征，也是对解释学难题的解答、对解释循环的超越和解释实践的修正。科学修辞学是对传统“等级”、“中心”和“意义”的否定，也是对后现代主义解构论、整体论和多元论某些趋向性特征的体现。科学修辞学是对规范主义、历史主义和建构主义科学社会学的修正，也是对一种“科学的社会修辞学”的倡导。
在第四章，从认识论、方法论的层面以及更为综合广阔的哲学层面，展示了科学修辞学的理论意义。在对传统认识论进行批判和重建、产生逻辑性、社会性和推理性知识的过程中，科学修辞学确立了自身的认识论地位。在建构科学语言、解答科学难题、形成科学共同体的过程中，科学修辞学体现了自身的方法论特征。在借鉴哲学转向成果、改造哲学传统理性、优化哲学理论文本的过程中，科学修辞学拥有了哲学上的合法性。
在结束语部分，论文在对科学修辞学的研究意义和发展前景给予积极评价的基础上，提出科学修辞学研究需要进一步思考和解决的一些理论问题，以及科学修辞学的一些缺陷和不足之处，进而描绘出科学修辞学在未来的调整策略和发展趋向。
This thesis consists of a preface , four systematic discussions and a concluding remarks.
In the preface , I first narrate briefly the domestic and overseas research condition about the rhetoric of science , advance some key concepts and some important questions in the research of rhetoric of science. Then I narrate the basic train of thought and main point of view in writing this theis , illustrate the theoretical meaning and value of research of rhetoric of science.
In the first part of this thesis , on the base of the developing background and trend of human being's philosophy and intellect in 20's century , I inquire into the theory foundation of the rhetoric of science . In my opinion , western rhetoric has passed three stages that including traditional rhetoric , modern rhetoric and contemporary rhetoric , western philosophy of science also appears a gradual progress that including "the linguistic turn" , "the hermeneutic turn" and "the rhetoric turn" . I think , contemparory rhetoric's turn toward science and philosophy of science's turn toward rhetoric help to bring about the rhetoric of science.
In the second part of this thesis , from the perspective of the rhetoric of science's theoretical territory , I analyze the rhetorical theory and method's effect in the science enterprise .1 think , the discovery of science concepts ,science theories and science facts can't be separated from rhetorical method such as metaphor , analogy and model , scientific experiment , scientific thesis and science society must need the rhetorical construction , the solution to those quarrels about scientific facts , scientific theories , scientific beliefs , scientific benefits need the rhetoric's paticipation , too.
In the third part of this thesis , I mainly discuss the thought communication and theory relation between the rhetoric of science and "the hermeneutic turn" , the rhetoric of science and the postmodernism , the rhetoric of science and the sociology of science . I think , the rhetoric of science not only has the distinct characteristic of the hermeneutics , but also is the answer to the hermeneutic questions , the transcendence over the hermeneutics circle and the correction to hermeneutic practice .The rhetoric of science is the denying of traditional "degree" , "center" and "meaning" , it also the manifest of the postmodern deconstructionalism , holism and pluralism . The rhetoric of science is the reformation of the normative sociology of science , the paradigmatic sociology and constructive sociology , it also is the
initiation of "the social rhetoric of science" .
In the fourth part of this thesis , from the angle of epistemology , methodology and from the more broad and comprehensive angle of philosophy , I reveal the theoretical meaning of the rhetoric of science . I think , through the criticize and reconstructing of traditional epistemology and producing logical knowledge , social knowledge and theoretical knowledge , the rhetoric of science establish its epistemological position . Through the construction of science language , solving to the science problems and the creation of science community , the rhetoric of science manifest its methodological characteristic . Through drawing lesson from philosophy turn , reforming traditional philosophy reason and optimizing philosophy theory and text, the rhetoric of science possess the legal status in philosophy .
In the concluding remarks , after a positive evaluation of the significance and prospect of the study of rhetoric of science , I put forward some theoretical questions that need to further think and solve in the study of rhetoric of science , some defects and insufficiency of rhetoric of science . In final , I describe the revising tactics and developing trend of the rhetoric of science in the future .
引文
[1] A.C.Grayling.An Introduction to Philosophical Logic.Oxford:Blackwell. 1997.
[2] A.C.Grayling.Philosophy:A Guide Through the Subject.New York:Oxford University Press.1995.
[3] Alan GGaross.The Rhetoric of Science.Cambridge:Harvard University Press. 1990.
[4] Alan GGross.Rhetoric of Science without Constraints.Rhetodca.9(1991):283-299.
[5] Alan GGross.Experiment as Text.Rhetoric Review. 11(1993):290-300.
[6] Alan GGross and Wiliiam M.Keith.Rhetorical Hermemeutics: Invention and Interpretation in the Age of Science. Albany: State University of New York Press. 1997.
[7] Andrew Ortony.Metaphor and Thought.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993.
[8] Andrew Picketing.Science and Pratice and Culture. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1992.
[9] Annette ERottenberg.Elements of Argument.New York:St.Martin's. 1996.
[10] Annette P.Rottenberg.The Structure of Argument.B oston:Bedford. 1996.
[11] A.J. Soyland.Psychology as Metaphor.London: SAGE. 1994.
[12] A.EMartinich.The Philosophy of Language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.2001.
[13] Barbara Couture.Toward a Phenomenological Rhetoric:Writing,profession,and Altruism.Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press. 1998.
[14] Barry Brummett.Reading Rhetorical Theory.Philadelphia:Harcourt College Publishers,2000.
[15] Barry Barens,David Bloor, John Henry. Science Knowledge:A Sociological Analysis.London:Athlone. 1996.
[16] Bruno Latour.Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Thourgh Society.Cambridge:Harvard University Press. 1987.
[17] Bruno.Latour and Steve.Woolgar.Laboratory Life:The Construction of Scientific Facts.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1986.
[18] C.A.Willard.Note on Simons,Gaonakar, and the Rhetoric of Science. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 85(1999): 104-106.
[19] Carolyn R.Miller.The Rhetoric of Dicision Science,or Herbert A.Simons Says.Science, Technology, and Human Value. 14(1989):43-46.
[20] Chaim Prelman.The New Rhetoric and The Humanities:Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications.Boston:D.Reidel Publishing Company.1979.
[21] Charles Alan Taylor.Defining Science:A Rhetoric of Demarcation. Wisconsin:The University of Wisconsin Press.1996.105.
[22] Charles Bazerman.Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1988.
[23] Charles Bazerrnan and James Paradis.Textual Dynamics of the Professions:Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities.Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1991.
[24] Charles Taylor.Philosophical Arguments.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1995.
[25] Christine Brooke-Rose.A Rhetoric of the Unreal:Studies in Narrative and Structure,Especially of the Fantastic.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1981.
[26] Christopher W.Tindale.Acts of Agruing:a Rhetorical Model of Argument.Albany:State University of New York Press. 1999.
[27] Daniel Rothbart:Explaining the Growth of Scientific Knowledge:Metaphors,Models ,and Meanings.New York: The Edwin Mellen Press.1997.
[28] David E. Leary. Metaphors in the History of Psychology.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
[29] David Locke.Science as Writing.New Haven and London:Yale University Press. 1991.
[30] David Papineau.The Philosophy of Science.Oxford:Oxford University Press. 1996.
[31] David R.Hiley, James EBohman,Richard Shusterman.The Interpretive Turn.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1991.
[32] David Wellberg. The Postmodem Movement.New York: Greenwood Press. 1985.
[33] Dilip Parameshwar Gaonakar.The Idea of Rhetoric in the Rhetoric of Science.The Southern Communication Journal.58(1993):271.
[34] Dimitri Ginev.Essay in the Hermeneutics of Science.Vermont:Ashgate Publishing Company.1997.
[35] D.Grover.A Presentential Theory of Truth.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1992.
[36] Edwin Black.Rhetoric Questions:Studies of Public Discourse.Chicago:University of Chacago Press. 1992.
[37] Ernest Sosa.Epistemology, Realism,and Truth.Philosophical Perspectives.7(1993): 1-16.
[38] Ernest Sosa and J.Kim.Epistemology:An Anthology. Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers.1999.
[39] Felicity Mellor.Scientists' Rhetoric in the Science Wars.Public Understand.Sci.8(1999):51-56.
[40] Gary Brent Madison.The Hermeneutics of Postmodernity:Figures and Themes.Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press. 1988.
[41] George Lackoff and M.Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1980.
[42] Gianni Vattimo.The End of Modernity:Nihilism and Hermeneutics in Post-modem Culture. Cambridge:Polity Press. 1988.
[43] Gianni Vattimo.Beyond Interpretation:The Meaning of Hermeneutics for Philosophy.Cambridge:Polity Press. 1997.
[44] Gray A.Olson.Literary Theory, Philosophy of Science,and Persuasive Discourse:Thought from a Neo-premodernist.Journal of Advanced Composition.13.2(1993):283-309.
[45] Greg Myers.Writing Biology: Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.1990.
[46] Hertry Krips,J.E.McGuire,Trevor Melia. Science,Reason,and Rhetoric. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 1995.
[47] Herbet W.Simons.Rhetoric Turn. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1990.
[48] Herbet W.Simons.Rhetorical Hermeneutics and the Project of Globalization.Quarterly Journal of Speech.85(1999):86-100.
[49] Howard Sankey.Incommensurability, Translation and Understanding.The Philosophy Quarterly.41 (1992):414-426.
[50] Ian Angus and Lenore Langsdorf.The Critical Turn:Rhetoric and Philosophy in Postmodem Discourse. Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press.1993.
[51] Jack Kimball.What Are We Doing When We "Talk Science"? http://iteslj.org/Artiles/Kimball-Science.html
[52] James A.Berlin.Rhetoric,Poetics,and Cultures.Urbana:NCTE. 1996.
[53] James Golden,Goodwin Berquist,William Coleman.The Rhetoric of Western Thought.Iowa:Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. 1982.
[54] James Ladyman.Understanding Philosophy of Science.New York:Routledge.2002.
[55] James S.Baumlin and Tita French Baumlin.Ethos:New Essays in Rhetoric and Critical Theory.Dallas:Southern Methodist University Press. 1994.
[56] James W.McAllister.Beauty and Revolution in Science.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1996.
[57] Jan Golinski.The Theory of Practice and the Practice of Theory: Sociological Approaches in the History of Science. ISIS.81 (1991): 492-505.
[58] Janus Head.Rhetoric,Science,and the Rhetoric of Science:An Exerceise in Interdisciplinarity.http://www.janushead.org/gwu-2001/hamilton.cfm
[59] J. E. McGuire and Trevor Melia.Some Cautionary Strictures on the Writing of the Rhetoric of Science.Rhetorica.7(1989):87-99.
[60] J.Salzer.Understanding Scientific Prose.Madison :University of Wisconsin Press. 1993.
[61] Jean Dietz Moss.Novelties in the Heavens:Rhetoric and Science in the Copernicus and Galileo.Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1993.
[62] Jeff Mason. Philosophical Rhetoric: The Function of Indirection in Philosophical Writing.London and New York : Routledge. 1989.
[63] John.A.Campbell.Response to Simons. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 85(1999): 101-103.
[64] John A. Schuster and Richard R. Yeo.The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method.Dordrecht:Reidel. 1986.
[65] John Bender and David E.Wellbery.The Ends of Rhetoric:History, Theory, Practice. Standford:Standford University Press.1990.
[66] John D.Ramage and John C.Bean.Writing Argument.New York:Macmillan. 1995.
[67] John Louis Locaites.Contemporary Rhetorical Theories.New York:The Guilford Press. 1999.
[68] John Lechte.Fifty Key Contemporary Thinkers:From Structuralism to Postmodernity.London and New York:Routledge. 1994.
[69] John.Me Gowan.Postmodernism and Its Critics.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1991.
[70] John Nelson,Allan Megill and Donald McCloskey. The Rhetoric of the Human Sciences.Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 1987.
[71] John Swales.Genre Analysis.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1990.
[72] John Ziman.Public Knowledge:An Essay Concerning the Social Dimensions of Science.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1968.
[73] Joseph Bleicher.Contemporary Hermeneutics.London:Routledge and Paul. 1980.
[74] Joseph Gusfield.The Literary Rhetoric of Science. American Sociological Review. 41 (1976): 16-43.
[75] Joseph Rouse.Engaging Science:How to Understand its Practices Philosophically.Ithaca:Comell University Press. 1996.
[76] J.T.Battalio.Essays in the Study of Scientific Discourse:Methods,Practice,and Pedagogy.Stamford:Ablex Publishing Corporation. 1998.
[77] K.Gottfried and K.G.Wilson.Science as a Cultural Construct.Nature.386(1996):545-547.
[78] Karlyn Kohrs Campell,Thomas R.Burkholder. Critiques of Contemporary Rhetoric. Boston:Wadsworth Publishing Company.1997.
[79] Ken Baake.Theodes of Lights and Their Rhetoric Representations. http://english.ttu.edu/baake/Newton.htm
[80] Larry Laudan.Beyond Positivism and Relativism:Theory, Method,and Evidence.Colorado:Westview Press. 1996.
[81] Lawrence J.Prelli:A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse.Columbia: University of South Carlolina Press. 1989.
[82] Lester Faigley.Fragment of Rationality:Postmodemity and the Subect of Composition.Pittsburgh:University of Pittsburgh Press. 1992.
[83] Marcello Dascal and Alan GGross.The Marriage of Pragmatics and Rhetoric. Philosophy and Rlaetoric.2(1999).
[84] Marcello Pera.The Discourse of Science.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1994.
[85] Marcello Pera and William R.Shea:Persuading Science:The Act of Scientific Rhetoric.Canton:Science History Publications. 1997.
[86] Marga Vicedo.Scientific Styles:Toward Some Common Ground in the History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science.Perspectives on Science.3(1995):249-251.
[87] Mary B.Coney.Terministic Screens:A Burkean Reading of the Experimental Article.Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.22(1992):149-159.
[88] M.A.K.Halliday and J.R.Martin.Wrinting Science. Pittsburgh: university of Pittsburgh Press.1994.
[89] M.David.Correspondence and Disquotition:An Essay on the Nature of Truth.Oxford:Oxford University Press. 1994.
[90] M.Hymers.Metaphor,Cognitivity, and Meaningholism.Philosophy and Rhetoric.4(1998).
[91] Michael Cahn.The Rhetoric of Rhetoric. Six Tropes of Disciplinary Self-Constitution. in: The Recovery of Rhetoric. Persuasive Discourse and Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences.ed. by Richard Roberts and J. Good. University of Virginia Press. 1993.
[92] Michael Calm.Rhetoric of Science. http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/research/rs.html
[93] Michael Clyne.Cultural Differences in the Organisation of Academic Texts.Journal of Pragmatics. 11 (1986). :211-247.
[94] Michael Dummett:The Logical Basis of Metaphysics.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1991.
[95] Michael GMoran and Michael Ballif. Twentieth-Century Rhetoircs and Rhetoricians.Westport:Greenwood Press.2000.XX.
[96] Michael Luntley.Contemporary Philosophy of Thought:Truth,World,Content. 1999.
[97] Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar.Representation in Scientific Practice.Cambridge:MTT Press. 1990.
[98] Miriam Solomn.The Pragmatic Turn in Naturalistic Philosophy of Science. Perspectives on Science.3(1995): 206-230.
[99] Misia Landau.Narratives of Human Evolution.New Haven: Yale University Press. 1991.
[100] M.W.Friedlander.At the Fringes of Science.Boulder:Westview Press. 1995.
[101] Nancy Nersessian.Opening the Black Box:Cognitive Science and the History of Science.OSIS.10(1995):194-211.
[102] N.Jardine.The Scenes of Inquiry:On the Reality of Questions in the Sciences. Oxford:Clarendon Press. 1991.
[103] Nell Ryder.Science and Rhetoric:on Language,Metaphor and the Communication of Science.http://www.uwe.ac.uk/fas/wavelength/wave 17/ryder.html
[104] Nicholas Bunnin and E.ETsui-James.The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.
[105] Oliver Leaman.The Future of Philosophy:Towards the Twenty-fast Century.London and New York:Routledge. 1998.
[106] Omar Swartz.The Rise of Rhetoric and Its Intersections with Contemporary Critical Thought.Colorado:Westview Press. 1998.
[107] Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg.The Rhetoric Tradition.Boston:St.Maritn's. 1990.
[108] Paul de Man:Allegories of Reading:Figural Language in Roussean,Nietzsche,Rilke,and Prouse.New Haven:Yale University Press. 1979.
[109] Paul Feyerabend. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge.New York:Verso. 1988.
[110] Paul Hoyningen-Huene.Reconstruction Scientific Revolution:Thomas S.Kuhn's Philosophy of Science.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1993.
[111] Paul Thagard.Conceptual Revolutions.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1992.
[112] P.Ricoeur.The Rule of Metaphor.Toronto:University of Toronto Press. 1977.
[113] Peter Dear.Totius in Verba:Rhetoric and Authority in The Early Royal Society.ISIS.76(1985):145-161.
[114] Peter Dear.The Literary Structure of Scientific Argument.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1991.
[115] Peter Ludlow:Reading in the Philosophy of Language.Cambridge:The MIT Press.1997.
[116] P.R.Gross and N.Levitt.Higer Superstition:The Academic Left and its Quarrels with Science.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press. 1998.
[117] Randy Allen Harris:Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science:Case Studies.New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1997.
[118] Randy Allen Harris:Linguistics Wars.New York:Oxfod University Press. 1993.
[119] Richard A.Cherwitz.Rhetoric and Philosophy.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1990.
[120] Richard D.Johnson-Sheehan.What Is Rhetoric of Science?http://www.wnm.edu./～rsheehan/WIRS.html
[121] Richard Harvey Brown. Society as Text: Essays on Rhetoric,Reason,and Reality.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1987.
[122] Richard Harvey Brown.Toward a Democratic Science:Scientific Narration and Civic Communication. New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1995.
[123] Richard Kirkham.Theories of Truth.Cambridge:The MIT Press. 1992.
[124] Richard Roberts and J.Good.The Recovery of Rhetoric:Persuasive Discourse and
Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences. 1993.
[125] Robert Marldey.Objectivity and Ideology: Boyle, Newton, and the Languages of Science.Genre.16(1983):355-372.
[126] Roderick P.Hart.Modem Rhetoric Criticism.Glenvew:Scott,Foresman. 1990.
[127] R.Dunbar.The Trouble with Science.Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1995.
[128] R.Giere.Cognitive Models of Science.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press. 1992.
[129] R.K.Merton .The Sociology of Science. Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1973.
[130] Roger M.White.The Structure of Metaphor:The Way the Language of Metaphor Works.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers. 1998.
[131] Scan Scheiderer.Science As Rhetoric.http://home.Columbus.rr.com/science％20as％20 rhetoric.htm
[132] Sharon Crowley.The Methodical Memory:Inventing in Current-Traditional Rhetoric. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1992.
[133] Sonja K.Foss,Karen A.Foss,and Robert Trapp.Comtemporary Perspective on Rhetoric.Waveland Press. 1985.
[134] Stephen P.Witte,Neil Nakadate,and Roger Dennis Cherry.A Rhetoric of Doing. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1992.
[135] Steve Fuller.Philosophy of Science and its Discontents.Boulder:Westview Press. 1989.
[136] Steve Fuller.Philosophy,Rhetoric,and the End of Knowledge. Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1992.
[137] Steven Connor.Postmodemist Culture:An Introduction to Theories of the Contemporary.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers. 1997.
[138] Steven Mailloux.Rhetoric,Sophistry, pragmatism. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.1995.
[139] Steven Toulmin.Cosmopolis:The Hidden Agenda of Modernity.Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1990.
[140] Susan Wells.Sweet Reason:Rhetoric and the Discourses of Modernity.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1996.
[141] Theresa Enos. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition from Ancient Times to the Information Ages.New York and London:Garland Publishing.Inc. 1996.
[142] Theresa Enos.Making and Unmaking the Prospects for Rhetoric.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum. 1997.
[143] Thomas B.Farrell. Norms of Rhetorical Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.1993.
[144] Thomas B.Farrel. Landmark Essays on Contemporary Rhetoric. New Jersey:Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1998.
[145] Thomas Carr.Descartes and the Resilience of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southem Illinois University Press. 1990.
[146] Thomas Kent.Paralogic Rhetoric:A Theory of Communicative Interaction.London: Bucknell University Press. 1993.
[147] Todd·May.Reconsidering Differences. Philadelphia:Pennsylvania State University Press.1997.
[148] Victor J. Vitanza.Writing Histories of Rhetoric. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1994.
[149] Victor J. Vitanza.Negation,Subjectivity, and the History of Rhetoric.Albany:State University of New York Press. 1997.
[150] Walter Jost,Michael J.Hyde. Rhetoric and Hermeneutics in Our Time:A Reader.New Haven:Yale University Press. 1997.
[151] Walter R.Fisher.Narrative Rationality and the Logic of Scientific Discourse.Argumentation.8(1994):21-32
[152] William A.Covino,David A.Jolliffe.Rhetoric:Concepts,Definitions,Boundaries.Boston:Allyn And Bacon. 1995.
[153] W.V.Quine.Pursuit of Truth.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1990.
[154] Rhetoric of Inquiry/Science.http://www.Icc.gatech.edu/gallery/rhetoric/issues/inquiry.html
[155] Rhetoric In The Hard Sciences. http://www.Icc.gatech.edu/gallery/rhetoric/issues/hardscience.html
[1] 爱因斯坦．爱因斯坦文集．许良英、范岱年编译．北京：商务印书馆．1976．
[2] 巴里·巴恩斯局外人看科学．鲁旭东译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[3] 巴里·巴恩斯．科学与知识社会学理论．鲁旭东译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[4] 巴里·巴恩斯、大卫·布鲁尔．相对主义、理性主义和知识社会学．哲学译丛．2000(1)．
[5] 贝尔纳．J．D．科学的社会功能．陈体芳译．桂林：广西师范大学．2003．
[6] 伯纳德·巴伯．科学与社会秩序．顾昕、郏斌祥、赵雷进译．北京：三联书店．1991．
[7] 布洛克曼．J．M．结构主义：莫斯科-布拉格-巴黎．李幼蒸译．北京：中国人民大学出版社．2003．
[8] 蔡仲．后现代反科学思潮．自然辩证法通讯．2003(2)．
[9] 蔡仲．“强纲领”SSK的相对主义特征．自然辩证法研究．2002(3)．
[10] 曹天予．魅力与危险——对科学史后现代主义观的反思咱然辩证法通讯．1993(3)．
[11] 陈嘉映．语言哲学．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[12] 陈浩．论西方修辞理论中的认识论观念．浙江社会科学．2000(7)．
[13] 波林·玛丽·罗斯诺．后现代主义与社会科学．张国清译．上海：上海译文出版社．1996．
[14] 大卫·布鲁尔．知识和社会意象．艾彦译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[15] 大卫·格里芬．后现代科学——科学魅力的再现．北京：中央编译出版社．1995．
[16] 大卫·格里芬后现代精神．北京：中央编译出版社．1998．
[17] 大卫·宁等．当代西方修辞学：批评模式与方法．常昌富、顾宝桐译．北京：中国社会科学出版社．1998．
[18] 邓志勇．西方“新修辞学”及其主要特点．四川外语学院学报．2001(1)．
[19] 菲利普·弗兰克．科学的哲学：科学和哲学之间的纽带．许良英译．上海：上海人民出版社．1985．
[20] 弗里德里希·尼采．古修辞学描述．上海：上海人民出版社．2001．
[21] 冯鹏志．科学共同体的社会学说明——默顿模式与库恩模式之比较．自然辩证法通讯．1992(5)．
[22] 高辛勇．修辞学与文学阅读．北京：北京大学出版社．1997．
[23] 郭贵春．当代科学实在论．北京：科学出版社．1991．
[24] 郭贵春．后现代科学实在论．北京：科学出版社．1995．
[25] 郭贵春．后现代科学哲学．长沙：湖南教育出版社．1998．
[26] 郭贵春．科学实在论教程．北京：高等教育出版社．2001．
[27] 郭贵春．科学知识动力学．武汉：华中师范大学出版社．1992．
[28] 郭贵春．语境与后现代科学哲学的发展．北京：科学出版社．2002．
[29] 郭贵春．走向21世纪的科学哲学．太原：山西科学技术出版社．2000．
[30] 郭贵春．“科学修辞学转向”及其意义．自然辩证法研究．1994(12)．
[31] 郭贵春．科学修辞学的本质特征．哲学研究．2000(7)．
[32] 郭贵春．科学隐喻的方法论意义．中国社会科学．2004(2)．
[33] 郭贵春．科学争论及其意义．自然辩证法通讯．1991(3)．
[34] 郭贵春、安军．隐喻的语境分析．江海学刊．2002(5)．
[35] 郭贵春、安军．隐喻与科学理论的陈述．社会科学研究．2003(4)．
[36] 哈格斯特龙．W．O．科学共同体：为获得承认而竞争．颜海译．1989(3)．
[37] 海格斯特龙．W．发现的社会承认．刘新铭译．1989(6)．
[38] 汉斯·波塞尔．科学：什么是科学．李文潮译．上海：三联书店．2002．
[39] 洪汉鼎．诠释学与修辞学．山东大学学报．2003(4)．
[40] 胡曙中．美国新修辞学研究．上海：上海外语教育出版社．1999．
[41] 胡曙中．西方修辞学传统之管窥．外国语．1992(2)．
[42] 黄小寒．“自然之书”读解——科学诠释学．上海：上海译文出版社．2002．
[43] 伽达默尔．真理与方法．洪汉鼎译．上海：上海译文出版社．1999．
[44] 伽达默尔?科学时代的理性?薛华等译．北京：国际文化出版公司．19887
[45] 伽达默尔．哲学解释学．上海：上海译文出版社．1994．
[46] 鞠玉梅．从西方修辞学的新理论看修辞学的发展趋势．四川外语学院学报．2003(1)．
[47] 杰里·加斯顿．科学的社会运行．顾昕等译．北京：光明日报出版社．1988．
[48] 卡尔-奥托·阿佩尔．哲学的改造．孙周兴译．上海：上海译文出版社．1994．
[49] 卡林·诺尔-塞蒂纳．制造知识——建构主义与科学的与境性．王善博等译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[50] 克里斯．解释学与自然科学：导论．哲学译丛．1999(1)．
[51] 肯尼斯·博克等．当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评．常昌富、顾宝桐译．北京：中国社会科学出版社．1998．
[52] 孔宪毅、邢润川．论争鸣对自然科学理论的作用．科学技术与辩证法．1997(5)．
[53] 李幼蒸．理论符号学导论．北京：社会科学文献出版社．1999．
[54] 李醒民、宋德生、王身立．科学发现集．长沙：湖南科学技术出版社．1998．
[55] 李秀丽．语言哲学视野中的隐喻．清华大学学报．2001(5)．
[56] 理查德·伯恩斯坦．超越客观主义与相对主义．郭小平等译．北京：光明日报出版社．1992．
[57] 理查德·罗蒂．后哲学文化．上海：上海译文出版社．1992．
[58] 理查德·罗蒂．李幼蒸译．哲学与自然之镜．上海：三联书店出版社．2003．
[59] 理查德·罗蒂．真理与进步．杨玉成译．北京：华夏出版社．2003．
[60] 刘大椿．科学技术哲学导论．北京：中国人民大学出版社．2000．
[61] 刘大椿．科学活动论·互补方法论．桂林：广西师范大学出版社．2002．
[62] 刘大椿．科学哲学．北京：人民出版社．1998．
[63] 刘华杰．科学元堪中SSK学派的历史与方法论述评．哲学研究．2000(1)．
[64] 刘瑶琚．科学社会学．上海：上海人民出版社．1990．
[65] 刘郎．科学实验论．大自然探索．1991(3)．
[66] 马蒂尼奇．A．P语言哲学．牟博、杨音莱、韩林合等译．北京：商务印书馆．1998．
[67] 马来平．与SSK对话：中国科技哲学的前沿课题．哲学动态．2002(12)．
[68] 马天俊．修辞价值重估——论修辞的认知奠基意义．天津社会科学．2000(1)．
[69] 麦克劳德．R．科学社会史及内在论和外在论者之争．王开恩译．科学学译丛．1990(2)．
[70] 麦克洛斯基等．社会科学的措辞．许宝强等译．北京：三联书店．2000．
[71] 迈克尔·马尔凯．科学与知识社会学．林聚任等译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[72] 孟建伟．从科学哲学到科学社会学．自然辩证法通讯．1998(3)．
[73] 莫少群．SSK科学争论研究述评启然辩证法研究．2001(11)．
[74] 牟博编．留美哲学博士文选(当代基础理论研究卷)．北京：商务印书馆．2002．
[75] 彭增安．语用·修辞·文化．上海：学林出版社．1998．
[76] 普特南．理性、真理和历史．童世俊译．上海：上海译文出版社．1997．
[77] 浦根祥．科学知识本性的建构主义解释初探．科学技术与辩证法．1999(6)．
[78] 邱仁宗成功之路——科学发现的模式．北京：人民出版社．1987．
[79] 沈铭贤、王淼洋．科学哲学导论．上海：上海教育出版社．1991．
[80] 施太格谬勒．当代哲学主流(上)．王炳文等译．北京：商务印书馆．1986．
[81] 施太格谬勒．当代哲学主流(下)．王炳文等译．北京：商务印书馆．1992．
[82] 史蒂芬·科尔．科学的制造：在自然界和社会之间．林建成、王毅译．上海：上海人民出版社．2001．
[83] 史蒂文·塞德曼编．吴世雄、陈维振、王峰、陈明达译．后现代转向——社会理论的新视角．沈阳：辽宁教育出版社．2001．
[84] 宋海龙．科学社会学视野中的科学理论之争．自然辩证法通讯．1999(3)．
[85] 孙汝建．接受修辞学．外国语．1994(1)
[86] 泰伦斯·霍克斯．隐喻．高丙中译．北京：昆仑出版社．1992．
[87] 谭学纯、朱玲．广义修辞学．合肥：安徽教育出版社．2001．
[88] 图尔明．S．E．对修辞学的诽谤．哲学译丛．1993(4)．
[89] 涂纪亮、罗嘉昌．当代西方著名哲学家评传(第三卷科学哲学)．济南：山东人民出版社．1996．
[90] 托马斯·库恩．科学知识作为历史产品．纪树立译．自然辩证法通讯．1988(5)．
[91] 托马斯·库恩．必要的张力．范岱年、纪树立等译．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[92] 托马斯·库恩．科学革命的结构．金吾伦、胡新和译．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[93] 王德春等．外国现代修辞学概况．福州：福建人民出版社．1986．
[94] 王善博．知识的制造与实验室研究——诺尔的科学建构论研究．自然辩证法研究．2001(8)．
[95] 温科学．论当代英美修辞学的演变．外语教学．2002(4)．
[96] 科学．西方修辞哲学．修辞学习．2001(2)．
[97] 武夷山．科学与修辞．http://www.chinainfo.gov.cn/j2ee/website/ChinaInfo/ViewInfoText. jsp infoid=68293
[98] 香港中文大学哲学系．分析哲学与科学哲学论文集．香港：香港中文大学新亚书院．1989．
[99] 香港中文大学哲学系．分析哲学与语言哲学论文集．香港：香港中文大学新亚书院．1993．
[100] 徐有渔．哥白尼式的革命．上海：三联书店．1994．
[101] 徐有渔、周国平等．语言哲学：当代英美与德法传统比较研究．北京：三联书店．1996．
[102] 亚里士多德．修辞学．罗念生译．北京：三联书店．1991．
[103] 杨宏秀．哲学文本中的隐喻．云南社会科学．2001(1)．
[104] 杨丽君．科技论文的修辞特点．鞍山钢铁学院学报．2002(10)．
[105] 殷杰、郭贵春．哲学对话的新平台——科学语用学的元理论研究．太原：山西科学技术出版社．2003．
[106] 约翰·齐曼．可靠的知识——对科学信仰中原因的探索．赵振江译．北京：商务印书馆．2003．
[107] 约翰·奇曼．元科学导论．刘珺珺等译．长沙：湖南人民出版社．1988．
[108] 约翰·齐曼．知识的力量——科学的社会范畴．许立达等译．上海：上海科学技术出版社．1985．
[109] 约翰·塞尔．心灵、语言和社会．上海：上海译文出版社．2001．
[110] 约瑟夫·劳斯．知识与权力——走向科学的政治哲学．盛晓明、邱慧、孟强译．北京：北京大学出版社．2004．
[111] 于尔根·哈贝马斯．后形而上学思想．曹卫东、付德根译．南京：译林出版社．2001．
[112] 于尔根·哈贝马斯．交往与社会进化．张博树译．重庆：重庆出版社．1989．
[113] 詹姆斯·费伦．作为修辞的叙事．．陈永国译．北京：北京大学出版社．2002．
[114] 詹姆斯．w．麦卡里斯特．美与科学革命．李为译．长春：吉林人民出版社．2000．
[115] 章士嵘．科学发现的逻辑．北京：人民出版社．1986．
[116] 张会森．修辞学通论．上海：上海外语教育出版社．2002．
[117] 张会森．论隐喻．修辞学习．1994(5)．
[118] 赵一凡．欧美新学赏析．北京：中央编译出版社．1996．
[119] 中国修辞学会．迈向21世纪的修辞学研究．广东人民出版社．2001．
[120] 周昌忠．西方现代语言哲学．上海：上海人民出版社．1992．
[121] 周颖．保罗·德曼：从主体性到修辞性．外国文学．2001(2)．
[122] 朱永生、董宏乐．科技语篇中的词汇隐喻、语法隐喻及其互补性．山东外语教学．2001(4)．
[2] A.C.Grayling.Philosophy:A Guide Through the Subject.New York:Oxford University Press.1995.
[3] Alan GGaross.The Rhetoric of Science.Cambridge:Harvard University Press. 1990.
[4] Alan GGross.Rhetoric of Science without Constraints.Rhetodca.9(1991):283-299.
[5] Alan GGross.Experiment as Text.Rhetoric Review. 11(1993):290-300.
[6] Alan GGross and Wiliiam M.Keith.Rhetorical Hermemeutics: Invention and Interpretation in the Age of Science. Albany: State University of New York Press. 1997.
[7] Andrew Ortony.Metaphor and Thought.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993.
[8] Andrew Picketing.Science and Pratice and Culture. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1992.
[9] Annette ERottenberg.Elements of Argument.New York:St.Martin's. 1996.
[10] Annette P.Rottenberg.The Structure of Argument.B oston:Bedford. 1996.
[11] A.J. Soyland.Psychology as Metaphor.London: SAGE. 1994.
[12] A.EMartinich.The Philosophy of Language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.2001.
[13] Barbara Couture.Toward a Phenomenological Rhetoric:Writing,profession,and Altruism.Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press. 1998.
[14] Barry Brummett.Reading Rhetorical Theory.Philadelphia:Harcourt College Publishers,2000.
[15] Barry Barens,David Bloor, John Henry. Science Knowledge:A Sociological Analysis.London:Athlone. 1996.
[16] Bruno Latour.Science in Action:How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Thourgh Society.Cambridge:Harvard University Press. 1987.
[17] Bruno.Latour and Steve.Woolgar.Laboratory Life:The Construction of Scientific Facts.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1986.
[18] C.A.Willard.Note on Simons,Gaonakar, and the Rhetoric of Science. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 85(1999): 104-106.
[19] Carolyn R.Miller.The Rhetoric of Dicision Science,or Herbert A.Simons Says.Science, Technology, and Human Value. 14(1989):43-46.
[20] Chaim Prelman.The New Rhetoric and The Humanities:Essays on Rhetoric and its Applications.Boston:D.Reidel Publishing Company.1979.
[21] Charles Alan Taylor.Defining Science:A Rhetoric of Demarcation. Wisconsin:The University of Wisconsin Press.1996.105.
[22] Charles Bazerman.Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1988.
[23] Charles Bazerrnan and James Paradis.Textual Dynamics of the Professions:Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities.Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1991.
[24] Charles Taylor.Philosophical Arguments.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1995.
[25] Christine Brooke-Rose.A Rhetoric of the Unreal:Studies in Narrative and Structure,Especially of the Fantastic.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1981.
[26] Christopher W.Tindale.Acts of Agruing:a Rhetorical Model of Argument.Albany:State University of New York Press. 1999.
[27] Daniel Rothbart:Explaining the Growth of Scientific Knowledge:Metaphors,Models ,and Meanings.New York: The Edwin Mellen Press.1997.
[28] David E. Leary. Metaphors in the History of Psychology.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
[29] David Locke.Science as Writing.New Haven and London:Yale University Press. 1991.
[30] David Papineau.The Philosophy of Science.Oxford:Oxford University Press. 1996.
[31] David R.Hiley, James EBohman,Richard Shusterman.The Interpretive Turn.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1991.
[32] David Wellberg. The Postmodem Movement.New York: Greenwood Press. 1985.
[33] Dilip Parameshwar Gaonakar.The Idea of Rhetoric in the Rhetoric of Science.The Southern Communication Journal.58(1993):271.
[34] Dimitri Ginev.Essay in the Hermeneutics of Science.Vermont:Ashgate Publishing Company.1997.
[35] D.Grover.A Presentential Theory of Truth.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1992.
[36] Edwin Black.Rhetoric Questions:Studies of Public Discourse.Chicago:University of Chacago Press. 1992.
[37] Ernest Sosa.Epistemology, Realism,and Truth.Philosophical Perspectives.7(1993): 1-16.
[38] Ernest Sosa and J.Kim.Epistemology:An Anthology. Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers.1999.
[39] Felicity Mellor.Scientists' Rhetoric in the Science Wars.Public Understand.Sci.8(1999):51-56.
[40] Gary Brent Madison.The Hermeneutics of Postmodernity:Figures and Themes.Bloomington and Indianapolis:Indiana University Press. 1988.
[41] George Lackoff and M.Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1980.
[42] Gianni Vattimo.The End of Modernity:Nihilism and Hermeneutics in Post-modem Culture. Cambridge:Polity Press. 1988.
[43] Gianni Vattimo.Beyond Interpretation:The Meaning of Hermeneutics for Philosophy.Cambridge:Polity Press. 1997.
[44] Gray A.Olson.Literary Theory, Philosophy of Science,and Persuasive Discourse:Thought from a Neo-premodernist.Journal of Advanced Composition.13.2(1993):283-309.
[45] Greg Myers.Writing Biology: Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.1990.
[46] Hertry Krips,J.E.McGuire,Trevor Melia. Science,Reason,and Rhetoric. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 1995.
[47] Herbet W.Simons.Rhetoric Turn. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1990.
[48] Herbet W.Simons.Rhetorical Hermeneutics and the Project of Globalization.Quarterly Journal of Speech.85(1999):86-100.
[49] Howard Sankey.Incommensurability, Translation and Understanding.The Philosophy Quarterly.41 (1992):414-426.
[50] Ian Angus and Lenore Langsdorf.The Critical Turn:Rhetoric and Philosophy in Postmodem Discourse. Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press.1993.
[51] Jack Kimball.What Are We Doing When We "Talk Science"? http://iteslj.org/Artiles/Kimball-Science.html
[52] James A.Berlin.Rhetoric,Poetics,and Cultures.Urbana:NCTE. 1996.
[53] James Golden,Goodwin Berquist,William Coleman.The Rhetoric of Western Thought.Iowa:Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. 1982.
[54] James Ladyman.Understanding Philosophy of Science.New York:Routledge.2002.
[55] James S.Baumlin and Tita French Baumlin.Ethos:New Essays in Rhetoric and Critical Theory.Dallas:Southern Methodist University Press. 1994.
[56] James W.McAllister.Beauty and Revolution in Science.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1996.
[57] Jan Golinski.The Theory of Practice and the Practice of Theory: Sociological Approaches in the History of Science. ISIS.81 (1991): 492-505.
[58] Janus Head.Rhetoric,Science,and the Rhetoric of Science:An Exerceise in Interdisciplinarity.http://www.janushead.org/gwu-2001/hamilton.cfm
[59] J. E. McGuire and Trevor Melia.Some Cautionary Strictures on the Writing of the Rhetoric of Science.Rhetorica.7(1989):87-99.
[60] J.Salzer.Understanding Scientific Prose.Madison :University of Wisconsin Press. 1993.
[61] Jean Dietz Moss.Novelties in the Heavens:Rhetoric and Science in the Copernicus and Galileo.Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1993.
[62] Jeff Mason. Philosophical Rhetoric: The Function of Indirection in Philosophical Writing.London and New York : Routledge. 1989.
[63] John.A.Campbell.Response to Simons. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 85(1999): 101-103.
[64] John A. Schuster and Richard R. Yeo.The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method.Dordrecht:Reidel. 1986.
[65] John Bender and David E.Wellbery.The Ends of Rhetoric:History, Theory, Practice. Standford:Standford University Press.1990.
[66] John D.Ramage and John C.Bean.Writing Argument.New York:Macmillan. 1995.
[67] John Louis Locaites.Contemporary Rhetorical Theories.New York:The Guilford Press. 1999.
[68] John Lechte.Fifty Key Contemporary Thinkers:From Structuralism to Postmodernity.London and New York:Routledge. 1994.
[69] John.Me Gowan.Postmodernism and Its Critics.Ithaca:Cornell University Press. 1991.
[70] John Nelson,Allan Megill and Donald McCloskey. The Rhetoric of the Human Sciences.Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. 1987.
[71] John Swales.Genre Analysis.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1990.
[72] John Ziman.Public Knowledge:An Essay Concerning the Social Dimensions of Science.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1968.
[73] Joseph Bleicher.Contemporary Hermeneutics.London:Routledge and Paul. 1980.
[74] Joseph Gusfield.The Literary Rhetoric of Science. American Sociological Review. 41 (1976): 16-43.
[75] Joseph Rouse.Engaging Science:How to Understand its Practices Philosophically.Ithaca:Comell University Press. 1996.
[76] J.T.Battalio.Essays in the Study of Scientific Discourse:Methods,Practice,and Pedagogy.Stamford:Ablex Publishing Corporation. 1998.
[77] K.Gottfried and K.G.Wilson.Science as a Cultural Construct.Nature.386(1996):545-547.
[78] Karlyn Kohrs Campell,Thomas R.Burkholder. Critiques of Contemporary Rhetoric. Boston:Wadsworth Publishing Company.1997.
[79] Ken Baake.Theodes of Lights and Their Rhetoric Representations. http://english.ttu.edu/baake/Newton.htm
[80] Larry Laudan.Beyond Positivism and Relativism:Theory, Method,and Evidence.Colorado:Westview Press. 1996.
[81] Lawrence J.Prelli:A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse.Columbia: University of South Carlolina Press. 1989.
[82] Lester Faigley.Fragment of Rationality:Postmodemity and the Subect of Composition.Pittsburgh:University of Pittsburgh Press. 1992.
[83] Marcello Dascal and Alan GGross.The Marriage of Pragmatics and Rhetoric. Philosophy and Rlaetoric.2(1999).
[84] Marcello Pera.The Discourse of Science.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1994.
[85] Marcello Pera and William R.Shea:Persuading Science:The Act of Scientific Rhetoric.Canton:Science History Publications. 1997.
[86] Marga Vicedo.Scientific Styles:Toward Some Common Ground in the History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science.Perspectives on Science.3(1995):249-251.
[87] Mary B.Coney.Terministic Screens:A Burkean Reading of the Experimental Article.Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.22(1992):149-159.
[88] M.A.K.Halliday and J.R.Martin.Wrinting Science. Pittsburgh: university of Pittsburgh Press.1994.
[89] M.David.Correspondence and Disquotition:An Essay on the Nature of Truth.Oxford:Oxford University Press. 1994.
[90] M.Hymers.Metaphor,Cognitivity, and Meaningholism.Philosophy and Rhetoric.4(1998).
[91] Michael Cahn.The Rhetoric of Rhetoric. Six Tropes of Disciplinary Self-Constitution. in: The Recovery of Rhetoric. Persuasive Discourse and Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences.ed. by Richard Roberts and J. Good. University of Virginia Press. 1993.
[92] Michael Calm.Rhetoric of Science. http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/research/rs.html
[93] Michael Clyne.Cultural Differences in the Organisation of Academic Texts.Journal of Pragmatics. 11 (1986). :211-247.
[94] Michael Dummett:The Logical Basis of Metaphysics.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1991.
[95] Michael GMoran and Michael Ballif. Twentieth-Century Rhetoircs and Rhetoricians.Westport:Greenwood Press.2000.XX.
[96] Michael Luntley.Contemporary Philosophy of Thought:Truth,World,Content. 1999.
[97] Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar.Representation in Scientific Practice.Cambridge:MTT Press. 1990.
[98] Miriam Solomn.The Pragmatic Turn in Naturalistic Philosophy of Science. Perspectives on Science.3(1995): 206-230.
[99] Misia Landau.Narratives of Human Evolution.New Haven: Yale University Press. 1991.
[100] M.W.Friedlander.At the Fringes of Science.Boulder:Westview Press. 1995.
[101] Nancy Nersessian.Opening the Black Box:Cognitive Science and the History of Science.OSIS.10(1995):194-211.
[102] N.Jardine.The Scenes of Inquiry:On the Reality of Questions in the Sciences. Oxford:Clarendon Press. 1991.
[103] Nell Ryder.Science and Rhetoric:on Language,Metaphor and the Communication of Science.http://www.uwe.ac.uk/fas/wavelength/wave 17/ryder.html
[104] Nicholas Bunnin and E.ETsui-James.The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.
[105] Oliver Leaman.The Future of Philosophy:Towards the Twenty-fast Century.London and New York:Routledge. 1998.
[106] Omar Swartz.The Rise of Rhetoric and Its Intersections with Contemporary Critical Thought.Colorado:Westview Press. 1998.
[107] Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg.The Rhetoric Tradition.Boston:St.Maritn's. 1990.
[108] Paul de Man:Allegories of Reading:Figural Language in Roussean,Nietzsche,Rilke,and Prouse.New Haven:Yale University Press. 1979.
[109] Paul Feyerabend. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge.New York:Verso. 1988.
[110] Paul Hoyningen-Huene.Reconstruction Scientific Revolution:Thomas S.Kuhn's Philosophy of Science.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press. 1993.
[111] Paul Thagard.Conceptual Revolutions.Princeton:Princeton University Press. 1992.
[112] P.Ricoeur.The Rule of Metaphor.Toronto:University of Toronto Press. 1977.
[113] Peter Dear.Totius in Verba:Rhetoric and Authority in The Early Royal Society.ISIS.76(1985):145-161.
[114] Peter Dear.The Literary Structure of Scientific Argument.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. 1991.
[115] Peter Ludlow:Reading in the Philosophy of Language.Cambridge:The MIT Press.1997.
[116] P.R.Gross and N.Levitt.Higer Superstition:The Academic Left and its Quarrels with Science.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press. 1998.
[117] Randy Allen Harris:Landmark Essays on Rhetoric of Science:Case Studies.New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1997.
[118] Randy Allen Harris:Linguistics Wars.New York:Oxfod University Press. 1993.
[119] Richard A.Cherwitz.Rhetoric and Philosophy.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1990.
[120] Richard D.Johnson-Sheehan.What Is Rhetoric of Science?http://www.wnm.edu./～rsheehan/WIRS.html
[121] Richard Harvey Brown. Society as Text: Essays on Rhetoric,Reason,and Reality.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.1987.
[122] Richard Harvey Brown.Toward a Democratic Science:Scientific Narration and Civic Communication. New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1995.
[123] Richard Kirkham.Theories of Truth.Cambridge:The MIT Press. 1992.
[124] Richard Roberts and J.Good.The Recovery of Rhetoric:Persuasive Discourse and
Disciplinarity in the Human Sciences. 1993.
[125] Robert Marldey.Objectivity and Ideology: Boyle, Newton, and the Languages of Science.Genre.16(1983):355-372.
[126] Roderick P.Hart.Modem Rhetoric Criticism.Glenvew:Scott,Foresman. 1990.
[127] R.Dunbar.The Trouble with Science.Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1995.
[128] R.Giere.Cognitive Models of Science.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press. 1992.
[129] R.K.Merton .The Sociology of Science. Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1973.
[130] Roger M.White.The Structure of Metaphor:The Way the Language of Metaphor Works.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers. 1998.
[131] Scan Scheiderer.Science As Rhetoric.http://home.Columbus.rr.com/science％20as％20 rhetoric.htm
[132] Sharon Crowley.The Methodical Memory:Inventing in Current-Traditional Rhetoric. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1992.
[133] Sonja K.Foss,Karen A.Foss,and Robert Trapp.Comtemporary Perspective on Rhetoric.Waveland Press. 1985.
[134] Stephen P.Witte,Neil Nakadate,and Roger Dennis Cherry.A Rhetoric of Doing. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1992.
[135] Steve Fuller.Philosophy of Science and its Discontents.Boulder:Westview Press. 1989.
[136] Steve Fuller.Philosophy,Rhetoric,and the End of Knowledge. Madison:University of Wisconsin Press. 1992.
[137] Steven Connor.Postmodemist Culture:An Introduction to Theories of the Contemporary.Cambridge:Blackwell Publishers. 1997.
[138] Steven Mailloux.Rhetoric,Sophistry, pragmatism. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.1995.
[139] Steven Toulmin.Cosmopolis:The Hidden Agenda of Modernity.Chicago:University of Chicago Press. 1990.
[140] Susan Wells.Sweet Reason:Rhetoric and the Discourses of Modernity.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1996.
[141] Theresa Enos. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition from Ancient Times to the Information Ages.New York and London:Garland Publishing.Inc. 1996.
[142] Theresa Enos.Making and Unmaking the Prospects for Rhetoric.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum. 1997.
[143] Thomas B.Farrell. Norms of Rhetorical Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.1993.
[144] Thomas B.Farrel. Landmark Essays on Contemporary Rhetoric. New Jersey:Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 1998.
[145] Thomas Carr.Descartes and the Resilience of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southem Illinois University Press. 1990.
[146] Thomas Kent.Paralogic Rhetoric:A Theory of Communicative Interaction.London: Bucknell University Press. 1993.
[147] Todd·May.Reconsidering Differences. Philadelphia:Pennsylvania State University Press.1997.
[148] Victor J. Vitanza.Writing Histories of Rhetoric. Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press. 1994.
[149] Victor J. Vitanza.Negation,Subjectivity, and the History of Rhetoric.Albany:State University of New York Press. 1997.
[150] Walter Jost,Michael J.Hyde. Rhetoric and Hermeneutics in Our Time:A Reader.New Haven:Yale University Press. 1997.
[151] Walter R.Fisher.Narrative Rationality and the Logic of Scientific Discourse.Argumentation.8(1994):21-32
[152] William A.Covino,David A.Jolliffe.Rhetoric:Concepts,Definitions,Boundaries.Boston:Allyn And Bacon. 1995.
[153] W.V.Quine.Pursuit of Truth.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.1990.
[154] Rhetoric of Inquiry/Science.http://www.Icc.gatech.edu/gallery/rhetoric/issues/inquiry.html
[155] Rhetoric In The Hard Sciences. http://www.Icc.gatech.edu/gallery/rhetoric/issues/hardscience.html
[1] 爱因斯坦．爱因斯坦文集．许良英、范岱年编译．北京：商务印书馆．1976．
[2] 巴里·巴恩斯局外人看科学．鲁旭东译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[3] 巴里·巴恩斯．科学与知识社会学理论．鲁旭东译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[4] 巴里·巴恩斯、大卫·布鲁尔．相对主义、理性主义和知识社会学．哲学译丛．2000(1)．
[5] 贝尔纳．J．D．科学的社会功能．陈体芳译．桂林：广西师范大学．2003．
[6] 伯纳德·巴伯．科学与社会秩序．顾昕、郏斌祥、赵雷进译．北京：三联书店．1991．
[7] 布洛克曼．J．M．结构主义：莫斯科-布拉格-巴黎．李幼蒸译．北京：中国人民大学出版社．2003．
[8] 蔡仲．后现代反科学思潮．自然辩证法通讯．2003(2)．
[9] 蔡仲．“强纲领”SSK的相对主义特征．自然辩证法研究．2002(3)．
[10] 曹天予．魅力与危险——对科学史后现代主义观的反思咱然辩证法通讯．1993(3)．
[11] 陈嘉映．语言哲学．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[12] 陈浩．论西方修辞理论中的认识论观念．浙江社会科学．2000(7)．
[13] 波林·玛丽·罗斯诺．后现代主义与社会科学．张国清译．上海：上海译文出版社．1996．
[14] 大卫·布鲁尔．知识和社会意象．艾彦译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[15] 大卫·格里芬．后现代科学——科学魅力的再现．北京：中央编译出版社．1995．
[16] 大卫·格里芬后现代精神．北京：中央编译出版社．1998．
[17] 大卫·宁等．当代西方修辞学：批评模式与方法．常昌富、顾宝桐译．北京：中国社会科学出版社．1998．
[18] 邓志勇．西方“新修辞学”及其主要特点．四川外语学院学报．2001(1)．
[19] 菲利普·弗兰克．科学的哲学：科学和哲学之间的纽带．许良英译．上海：上海人民出版社．1985．
[20] 弗里德里希·尼采．古修辞学描述．上海：上海人民出版社．2001．
[21] 冯鹏志．科学共同体的社会学说明——默顿模式与库恩模式之比较．自然辩证法通讯．1992(5)．
[22] 高辛勇．修辞学与文学阅读．北京：北京大学出版社．1997．
[23] 郭贵春．当代科学实在论．北京：科学出版社．1991．
[24] 郭贵春．后现代科学实在论．北京：科学出版社．1995．
[25] 郭贵春．后现代科学哲学．长沙：湖南教育出版社．1998．
[26] 郭贵春．科学实在论教程．北京：高等教育出版社．2001．
[27] 郭贵春．科学知识动力学．武汉：华中师范大学出版社．1992．
[28] 郭贵春．语境与后现代科学哲学的发展．北京：科学出版社．2002．
[29] 郭贵春．走向21世纪的科学哲学．太原：山西科学技术出版社．2000．
[30] 郭贵春．“科学修辞学转向”及其意义．自然辩证法研究．1994(12)．
[31] 郭贵春．科学修辞学的本质特征．哲学研究．2000(7)．
[32] 郭贵春．科学隐喻的方法论意义．中国社会科学．2004(2)．
[33] 郭贵春．科学争论及其意义．自然辩证法通讯．1991(3)．
[34] 郭贵春、安军．隐喻的语境分析．江海学刊．2002(5)．
[35] 郭贵春、安军．隐喻与科学理论的陈述．社会科学研究．2003(4)．
[36] 哈格斯特龙．W．O．科学共同体：为获得承认而竞争．颜海译．1989(3)．
[37] 海格斯特龙．W．发现的社会承认．刘新铭译．1989(6)．
[38] 汉斯·波塞尔．科学：什么是科学．李文潮译．上海：三联书店．2002．
[39] 洪汉鼎．诠释学与修辞学．山东大学学报．2003(4)．
[40] 胡曙中．美国新修辞学研究．上海：上海外语教育出版社．1999．
[41] 胡曙中．西方修辞学传统之管窥．外国语．1992(2)．
[42] 黄小寒．“自然之书”读解——科学诠释学．上海：上海译文出版社．2002．
[43] 伽达默尔．真理与方法．洪汉鼎译．上海：上海译文出版社．1999．
[44] 伽达默尔?科学时代的理性?薛华等译．北京：国际文化出版公司．19887
[45] 伽达默尔．哲学解释学．上海：上海译文出版社．1994．
[46] 鞠玉梅．从西方修辞学的新理论看修辞学的发展趋势．四川外语学院学报．2003(1)．
[47] 杰里·加斯顿．科学的社会运行．顾昕等译．北京：光明日报出版社．1988．
[48] 卡尔-奥托·阿佩尔．哲学的改造．孙周兴译．上海：上海译文出版社．1994．
[49] 卡林·诺尔-塞蒂纳．制造知识——建构主义与科学的与境性．王善博等译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[50] 克里斯．解释学与自然科学：导论．哲学译丛．1999(1)．
[51] 肯尼斯·博克等．当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评．常昌富、顾宝桐译．北京：中国社会科学出版社．1998．
[52] 孔宪毅、邢润川．论争鸣对自然科学理论的作用．科学技术与辩证法．1997(5)．
[53] 李幼蒸．理论符号学导论．北京：社会科学文献出版社．1999．
[54] 李醒民、宋德生、王身立．科学发现集．长沙：湖南科学技术出版社．1998．
[55] 李秀丽．语言哲学视野中的隐喻．清华大学学报．2001(5)．
[56] 理查德·伯恩斯坦．超越客观主义与相对主义．郭小平等译．北京：光明日报出版社．1992．
[57] 理查德·罗蒂．后哲学文化．上海：上海译文出版社．1992．
[58] 理查德·罗蒂．李幼蒸译．哲学与自然之镜．上海：三联书店出版社．2003．
[59] 理查德·罗蒂．真理与进步．杨玉成译．北京：华夏出版社．2003．
[60] 刘大椿．科学技术哲学导论．北京：中国人民大学出版社．2000．
[61] 刘大椿．科学活动论·互补方法论．桂林：广西师范大学出版社．2002．
[62] 刘大椿．科学哲学．北京：人民出版社．1998．
[63] 刘华杰．科学元堪中SSK学派的历史与方法论述评．哲学研究．2000(1)．
[64] 刘瑶琚．科学社会学．上海：上海人民出版社．1990．
[65] 刘郎．科学实验论．大自然探索．1991(3)．
[66] 马蒂尼奇．A．P语言哲学．牟博、杨音莱、韩林合等译．北京：商务印书馆．1998．
[67] 马来平．与SSK对话：中国科技哲学的前沿课题．哲学动态．2002(12)．
[68] 马天俊．修辞价值重估——论修辞的认知奠基意义．天津社会科学．2000(1)．
[69] 麦克劳德．R．科学社会史及内在论和外在论者之争．王开恩译．科学学译丛．1990(2)．
[70] 麦克洛斯基等．社会科学的措辞．许宝强等译．北京：三联书店．2000．
[71] 迈克尔·马尔凯．科学与知识社会学．林聚任等译．北京：东方出版社．2001．
[72] 孟建伟．从科学哲学到科学社会学．自然辩证法通讯．1998(3)．
[73] 莫少群．SSK科学争论研究述评启然辩证法研究．2001(11)．
[74] 牟博编．留美哲学博士文选(当代基础理论研究卷)．北京：商务印书馆．2002．
[75] 彭增安．语用·修辞·文化．上海：学林出版社．1998．
[76] 普特南．理性、真理和历史．童世俊译．上海：上海译文出版社．1997．
[77] 浦根祥．科学知识本性的建构主义解释初探．科学技术与辩证法．1999(6)．
[78] 邱仁宗成功之路——科学发现的模式．北京：人民出版社．1987．
[79] 沈铭贤、王淼洋．科学哲学导论．上海：上海教育出版社．1991．
[80] 施太格谬勒．当代哲学主流(上)．王炳文等译．北京：商务印书馆．1986．
[81] 施太格谬勒．当代哲学主流(下)．王炳文等译．北京：商务印书馆．1992．
[82] 史蒂芬·科尔．科学的制造：在自然界和社会之间．林建成、王毅译．上海：上海人民出版社．2001．
[83] 史蒂文·塞德曼编．吴世雄、陈维振、王峰、陈明达译．后现代转向——社会理论的新视角．沈阳：辽宁教育出版社．2001．
[84] 宋海龙．科学社会学视野中的科学理论之争．自然辩证法通讯．1999(3)．
[85] 孙汝建．接受修辞学．外国语．1994(1)
[86] 泰伦斯·霍克斯．隐喻．高丙中译．北京：昆仑出版社．1992．
[87] 谭学纯、朱玲．广义修辞学．合肥：安徽教育出版社．2001．
[88] 图尔明．S．E．对修辞学的诽谤．哲学译丛．1993(4)．
[89] 涂纪亮、罗嘉昌．当代西方著名哲学家评传(第三卷科学哲学)．济南：山东人民出版社．1996．
[90] 托马斯·库恩．科学知识作为历史产品．纪树立译．自然辩证法通讯．1988(5)．
[91] 托马斯·库恩．必要的张力．范岱年、纪树立等译．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[92] 托马斯·库恩．科学革命的结构．金吾伦、胡新和译．北京：北京大学出版社．2003．
[93] 王德春等．外国现代修辞学概况．福州：福建人民出版社．1986．
[94] 王善博．知识的制造与实验室研究——诺尔的科学建构论研究．自然辩证法研究．2001(8)．
[95] 温科学．论当代英美修辞学的演变．外语教学．2002(4)．
[96] 科学．西方修辞哲学．修辞学习．2001(2)．
[97] 武夷山．科学与修辞．http://www.chinainfo.gov.cn/j2ee/website/ChinaInfo/ViewInfoText. jsp infoid=68293
[98] 香港中文大学哲学系．分析哲学与科学哲学论文集．香港：香港中文大学新亚书院．1989．
[99] 香港中文大学哲学系．分析哲学与语言哲学论文集．香港：香港中文大学新亚书院．1993．
[100] 徐有渔．哥白尼式的革命．上海：三联书店．1994．
[101] 徐有渔、周国平等．语言哲学：当代英美与德法传统比较研究．北京：三联书店．1996．
[102] 亚里士多德．修辞学．罗念生译．北京：三联书店．1991．
[103] 杨宏秀．哲学文本中的隐喻．云南社会科学．2001(1)．
[104] 杨丽君．科技论文的修辞特点．鞍山钢铁学院学报．2002(10)．
[105] 殷杰、郭贵春．哲学对话的新平台——科学语用学的元理论研究．太原：山西科学技术出版社．2003．
[106] 约翰·齐曼．可靠的知识——对科学信仰中原因的探索．赵振江译．北京：商务印书馆．2003．
[107] 约翰·奇曼．元科学导论．刘珺珺等译．长沙：湖南人民出版社．1988．
[108] 约翰·齐曼．知识的力量——科学的社会范畴．许立达等译．上海：上海科学技术出版社．1985．
[109] 约翰·塞尔．心灵、语言和社会．上海：上海译文出版社．2001．
[110] 约瑟夫·劳斯．知识与权力——走向科学的政治哲学．盛晓明、邱慧、孟强译．北京：北京大学出版社．2004．
[111] 于尔根·哈贝马斯．后形而上学思想．曹卫东、付德根译．南京：译林出版社．2001．
[112] 于尔根·哈贝马斯．交往与社会进化．张博树译．重庆：重庆出版社．1989．
[113] 詹姆斯·费伦．作为修辞的叙事．．陈永国译．北京：北京大学出版社．2002．
[114] 詹姆斯．w．麦卡里斯特．美与科学革命．李为译．长春：吉林人民出版社．2000．
[115] 章士嵘．科学发现的逻辑．北京：人民出版社．1986．
[116] 张会森．修辞学通论．上海：上海外语教育出版社．2002．
[117] 张会森．论隐喻．修辞学习．1994(5)．
[118] 赵一凡．欧美新学赏析．北京：中央编译出版社．1996．
[119] 中国修辞学会．迈向21世纪的修辞学研究．广东人民出版社．2001．
[120] 周昌忠．西方现代语言哲学．上海：上海人民出版社．1992．
[121] 周颖．保罗·德曼：从主体性到修辞性．外国文学．2001(2)．
[122] 朱永生、董宏乐．科技语篇中的词汇隐喻、语法隐喻及其互补性．山东外语教学．2001(4)．