我国对外报道新修辞情境理论研究
|
摘要
随着全球化的发展,国际交流日渐频繁。如何利用媒体树立一个正面积极的国家形象,提升国家软实力,成了对外报道的主要任务。本研究关注的是对外报道中一种以趣味性和人情味取胜、时效性为次的新闻文体:软新闻。目前,国内以软新闻为对象的编译研究还没有受到足够的重视,相关研究不仅数量少,而且角度单一,绝大多数均运用德国功能派的翻译理论解释软新闻编译过程中使用的增减译法、改译法等手段的合理性,并没有提出具体可操作的编译策略。而且,这些研究也没有充分考虑到软新闻的特殊性,在具体理论运用时都没有以软新闻的传播效果为出发点,未能突出其“新闻性”。本研究通过运用西方新修辞学的相关理论,从传播效果出发,旨在构建我国对外英语报道类软新闻编译的新修辞情境理论,以解决目前我国对外英语报道类软新闻普遍编译存在的三大问题:受众意识薄弱、软新闻不“软”、以及缺乏可信度。
作为应用型研究,本研究以西方新修辞学为理论基础,从意义、动机、价值观、媒介、辩证法等角度系统论证了对外报道类软新闻修辞情境中三大要素(受众、新闻价值和修辞权威)的构建过程。本研究在理论论证的基础上选取我国官方对外报道类软新闻的几大纸质载体中的实例,通过将其中文版和英文版中相应语篇进行比较分析,发现编译中存在的问题,并运用新修辞学理论提出具体的解决方案。
本研究认为,运用西方新修辞学的理论构建适宜的修辞情境,可以有效解决软新闻编译稿目前存在的三大问题,进而提高其传播效果。这主要是基于以下几个方面的考虑:首先,软新闻编译稿属于修辞话语,而修辞情境是与修辞话语紧密相连的,修辞话语参与修辞情境的创建,是修辞情境的有机组成部分。其次,构建适宜的修辞情境可以帮助编译者采取正确的修辞立场,即实现“有关主题本身的可用争论”、“观众的兴趣和特征”和“说话人的声音和隐含性格”三者之间的难以言状的平衡。最后,新修辞学与传播学的交叉、新修辞学的跨学科性、认知性、以及对合作关系、伦理和社会行为的关注使得它可以成为本研究的理论框架,为构建软新闻编译稿的修辞情境提供理论支持。
本研究主要在以下几个方面进行了创新:1)本研究在国内首次以传播效果为核心进行软新闻的编译研究,凸显了软新闻“趣味性”和“人情味”的特征,赋予了其“对外报道”的新闻属性。2)本研究在国内首次提出新修辞情境理论对于全面提高对外报道类软新闻传播效果的关键意义,明确指出该情境理论的三大主要构件:受众、新闻价值和编译者的修辞权威。3)本研究在国内首次将价值修辞学、论辩修辞学、动机修辞学、权力修辞学等西方新修辞学的主要研究维度作为理论支撑,提出了在编译过程中发挥受众主观能动性、软化软新闻以及树立编译者修辞权威的具体途径。4)本研究将翻译单位从句子及段落扩大为语篇,甚至超越了语篇范围。编译者被赋予了更大的自由度,他们摆脱了原文的束缚,在语篇结构、选材、论辩方式、媒介选择、辩证法运用等诸多方面都能发挥自己的创造性。
需要说明的是,修辞情境是一个非常广的概念,参与到情境中并发挥作用的除了上述三大要素外还有很多,本研究限于篇幅和精力不能一一论述,相信随着相关研究的发展,将有越来越多的要素得到关注。
With the development of globalization and increased intensity of internationalexchanges, how to avail ourselves of the media to create a positive national image andconsequently to enhance the soft power of our country has become the major concernin our international communication. In this study, we focus on the editing andtranslating of soft news, an indispensable part of international communication whichhas interestedness and human interest as its chief news values.
Unfortunately, relevant studies on soft news adaptation have not received enoughattention they deserve, in terms of not only the number of publications but also theperspectives adopted. Up till now, only five theories have been applied, with theSkopos Theory the most popular one. All the papers exclusively aim at justifying themethods of adaptation used in the translation process, such as addition, deletion, etc.,yet no concrete workable strategies have been suggested. What’s worse, those studieshave failed to take full consideration of the news values and communicationeffectiveness of soft news. Therefore, centering on communication effects and basedon theories in New Rheteric, we endeavor to construct appropriate rhetoric situationso as to solve the three major problems existing in soft news editing and translating inour international communication, namely, the lack of audience awareness, theinsufficiency in its softness and the disappointing level of credibility.
Application oriented, this study probes systematically into the construction of thethree main factors (audience, news values and rhetoric authority) in the rhetoricsituation for soft news from the perspectives of meaning, motive, values, media anddialectics, etc. All the examples in this study are selected from state-run soft newsmagazines to illustrate the existing problems in the process of editing and translating.The translation strategies proposed are based on the combination of data analysis andapplication of theories in New Rhetoric.
The originality of this study is manifested in the following aspects: 1) makingcommunication effects the core of soft news edition and translation and emphasizing news values such as intestedness and human interest; 2) recognizing the significanceof rhetoric situation theories for enhancing comprehensively the communicationeffects of soft news in our international communication, identifying the three majorcomponents in the situation in question, and proposing workable strategies forbringing the subjective initiative of audience into play, demonstrating news values andestablishing translator’s rhetoric authority; 3）introducing theories in New Rhetoric,especially those on meaning, vales, power, and argumentation, as theoretic support toguide the process of editing and translating; 4) enlarging the translation units fromwords and sentences to the whole passage and even beyond, thus giving translatorsmore freedom in structuring, material selection, and argumentation, etc.
We apply theories of New Rhetoric to construct the rhetoric situation withKenneth Burke’s enlarged situation theory as basis. Burke’s rhetoric situation theoryextends the range of rhetoric discourse significantly so much so that“effectiveliterature could be nothing but rhetoric”(Golden 313). Our assumption that theconstruction of suitable rhetoric situation based on New Rhetoric can effectively solvethe above three problems and enhance the communication effectiveness of the editionand translation of soft news is based on the following considerations: firstly, soft newsbelongs to rhetoric discourse, which is closely related to and also an indispensiblecomponent in rhetoric situation. Secondly, appropriate rhetoric situation can help thetranslator assume correct rhetoric stance, a proper balance among the availablearguments about the subject itself, the interests and peculiarities of the audience, thevoice and the implied character of the speaker. Thirdly, sharing the same origin withcommunication studies, New Rhetoric is characterized as interdisciplinary andcognitive, with an emphasis on cooperation, values and social behavior. All these makeit eligible for our theoretical framework, providing theoretical support in the processof translation.
It is noteworthy that rhetoric situation is a large concept and consists of manyfactors other than the three studied in this paper. We sincerely hope that with the development of relevant research, more and more factors will be brought to theforeground.
作为应用型研究,本研究以西方新修辞学为理论基础,从意义、动机、价值观、媒介、辩证法等角度系统论证了对外报道类软新闻修辞情境中三大要素(受众、新闻价值和修辞权威)的构建过程。本研究在理论论证的基础上选取我国官方对外报道类软新闻的几大纸质载体中的实例,通过将其中文版和英文版中相应语篇进行比较分析,发现编译中存在的问题,并运用新修辞学理论提出具体的解决方案。
本研究认为,运用西方新修辞学的理论构建适宜的修辞情境,可以有效解决软新闻编译稿目前存在的三大问题,进而提高其传播效果。这主要是基于以下几个方面的考虑:首先,软新闻编译稿属于修辞话语,而修辞情境是与修辞话语紧密相连的,修辞话语参与修辞情境的创建,是修辞情境的有机组成部分。其次,构建适宜的修辞情境可以帮助编译者采取正确的修辞立场,即实现“有关主题本身的可用争论”、“观众的兴趣和特征”和“说话人的声音和隐含性格”三者之间的难以言状的平衡。最后,新修辞学与传播学的交叉、新修辞学的跨学科性、认知性、以及对合作关系、伦理和社会行为的关注使得它可以成为本研究的理论框架,为构建软新闻编译稿的修辞情境提供理论支持。
本研究主要在以下几个方面进行了创新:1)本研究在国内首次以传播效果为核心进行软新闻的编译研究,凸显了软新闻“趣味性”和“人情味”的特征,赋予了其“对外报道”的新闻属性。2)本研究在国内首次提出新修辞情境理论对于全面提高对外报道类软新闻传播效果的关键意义,明确指出该情境理论的三大主要构件:受众、新闻价值和编译者的修辞权威。3)本研究在国内首次将价值修辞学、论辩修辞学、动机修辞学、权力修辞学等西方新修辞学的主要研究维度作为理论支撑,提出了在编译过程中发挥受众主观能动性、软化软新闻以及树立编译者修辞权威的具体途径。4)本研究将翻译单位从句子及段落扩大为语篇,甚至超越了语篇范围。编译者被赋予了更大的自由度,他们摆脱了原文的束缚,在语篇结构、选材、论辩方式、媒介选择、辩证法运用等诸多方面都能发挥自己的创造性。
需要说明的是,修辞情境是一个非常广的概念,参与到情境中并发挥作用的除了上述三大要素外还有很多,本研究限于篇幅和精力不能一一论述,相信随着相关研究的发展,将有越来越多的要素得到关注。
With the development of globalization and increased intensity of internationalexchanges, how to avail ourselves of the media to create a positive national image andconsequently to enhance the soft power of our country has become the major concernin our international communication. In this study, we focus on the editing andtranslating of soft news, an indispensable part of international communication whichhas interestedness and human interest as its chief news values.
Unfortunately, relevant studies on soft news adaptation have not received enoughattention they deserve, in terms of not only the number of publications but also theperspectives adopted. Up till now, only five theories have been applied, with theSkopos Theory the most popular one. All the papers exclusively aim at justifying themethods of adaptation used in the translation process, such as addition, deletion, etc.,yet no concrete workable strategies have been suggested. What’s worse, those studieshave failed to take full consideration of the news values and communicationeffectiveness of soft news. Therefore, centering on communication effects and basedon theories in New Rheteric, we endeavor to construct appropriate rhetoric situationso as to solve the three major problems existing in soft news editing and translating inour international communication, namely, the lack of audience awareness, theinsufficiency in its softness and the disappointing level of credibility.
Application oriented, this study probes systematically into the construction of thethree main factors (audience, news values and rhetoric authority) in the rhetoricsituation for soft news from the perspectives of meaning, motive, values, media anddialectics, etc. All the examples in this study are selected from state-run soft newsmagazines to illustrate the existing problems in the process of editing and translating.The translation strategies proposed are based on the combination of data analysis andapplication of theories in New Rhetoric.
The originality of this study is manifested in the following aspects: 1) makingcommunication effects the core of soft news edition and translation and emphasizing news values such as intestedness and human interest; 2) recognizing the significanceof rhetoric situation theories for enhancing comprehensively the communicationeffects of soft news in our international communication, identifying the three majorcomponents in the situation in question, and proposing workable strategies forbringing the subjective initiative of audience into play, demonstrating news values andestablishing translator’s rhetoric authority; 3）introducing theories in New Rhetoric,especially those on meaning, vales, power, and argumentation, as theoretic support toguide the process of editing and translating; 4) enlarging the translation units fromwords and sentences to the whole passage and even beyond, thus giving translatorsmore freedom in structuring, material selection, and argumentation, etc.
We apply theories of New Rhetoric to construct the rhetoric situation withKenneth Burke’s enlarged situation theory as basis. Burke’s rhetoric situation theoryextends the range of rhetoric discourse significantly so much so that“effectiveliterature could be nothing but rhetoric”(Golden 313). Our assumption that theconstruction of suitable rhetoric situation based on New Rhetoric can effectively solvethe above three problems and enhance the communication effectiveness of the editionand translation of soft news is based on the following considerations: firstly, soft newsbelongs to rhetoric discourse, which is closely related to and also an indispensiblecomponent in rhetoric situation. Secondly, appropriate rhetoric situation can help thetranslator assume correct rhetoric stance, a proper balance among the availablearguments about the subject itself, the interests and peculiarities of the audience, thevoice and the implied character of the speaker. Thirdly, sharing the same origin withcommunication studies, New Rhetoric is characterized as interdisciplinary andcognitive, with an emphasis on cooperation, values and social behavior. All these makeit eligible for our theoretical framework, providing theoretical support in the processof translation.
It is noteworthy that rhetoric situation is a large concept and consists of manyfactors other than the three studied in this paper. We sincerely hope that with the development of relevant research, more and more factors will be brought to theforeground.
引文
8转引自程曼丽,国际传播学教程,北京大学出版社,2006:117。
9转引自郭可,“中国英语媒体传播效果研究”,国际新闻界4(2002):42。
10候迎忠,郭光华,对外报道策略与技巧,中国传媒大学出版社,2009:113。
11转引自丹尼斯·麦奎尔,受众分析,中国人民出版社,2006:63。
14引自托伊恩·A·梵·迪克,作为话语的新闻,华夏出版社:2003,57。
Aristotle. Rhetoric and Poetic. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts and Ingram Bywater. RandomHouse, Inc., 1954.
Ban, H.“Soft News.”The International Encyclopedia of Communication. Ed. W.Donsbach. Blackwell Publishing: Reference Online. 2008. 12 Oct.2010.
Bateson, G. Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. Hampton Press, 1979.
Baum, M. A.“Sex, Lies and War: How Soft News Brings Policy to the InattentivePublic.”American Political Science Review 96.1 (2002): 91-109.
Bell, A. The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell Publication, 1991.
Berg, David.“Rhetoric, Reality, and Mass Media.”Quarterly Journal of Speech58.3(1972): 255-56.
Biesecker, Barbara A.“Rethinking the Rhetorical Situation from Within the Thematicof Difference.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 22.2(1989): 110-30.
Biter, Lloyd.“Rhetoric Situation.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 1(1968): 1-14.
Black, Edwin. Rhetoric Criticism: A Study in Method. New York: The MacmillanCompany, 1965.
Booth, W. C. The Rhetoric of Rhetoric: The Quest for Effective Communication.Blackwell Publishing, 2004.
Brockiede, Wayne E., and D. Ehninger.“Toulmin on Argument: An Interpretation andApplication.”Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLVI(1960)：44-53.
Bryant D. C., and Karl R. Wallace. Fundamentals of Public Speaking. London:Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976.
Buchholz, Ted. Reporting for the Printed Media. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.,1993.
Burke, Kenneth.“Rhetoric---Old and New.”The Journal of General Education,5(1951): 203-209.
- - -. Language as Symbolic Action: Essay on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley:University of California Press, 1966.
- - -. A Grammar of Motives. University of California Press, 1969a.
- - -. A Rhetoric of Motives. University of California Press, 1969b.
- - -. Attitudes Toward History. California: University of California Press, 1984.
Campbell, G. The Philosophy of Rhetoic. Southern Illinois University Press, 1963.
Carter, C., and L. Steiner, eds. Critical Reading: Media and Gender. Maidenhead: OpenUniversity Press, 2004.
Chesebro, James W.“Epistemology and Ontology as Dialectical Modes in the Writingsof Kenneth Burke.”Communication Quarterly 36(1988): 175-91.
Ciesielski, Dennis J.“‘Secular Pragmatism’: Kenneth Burke and the Resocializationof Literature and Theory.”Kenneth Burke and the 21st Century. Ed. Bernard L.Brock. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999.
Clausse, R.“The Mass Public at Grips with Mass Communication.”InternationalSocial Science Journal, 20(4): 625-43.
Connor, Ulla. Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second-languageWriting. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Consigny, Scott.“Rhetoric and Its Situations.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 7(1974): 175-86.
Corbett, E. P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1965.
Crowley, Sharon, and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students.Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1999.
Derrida, Jacques.“Semiology and Grammatology.”Positions. Trans. Alan Bass.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1981.
Dor, D. Intifada Hits the Headlines. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004.
Ehninger, D.“On Systems of Rhetoric.”Professing the New Rhetorics. Ed. TheresaEnos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
Eubanks, Ralph, and Virgil Baker.“Toward an Axiology of Rhetoric.”Contemporary
Theories of Rhetoric: Selected Readings. Ed. Richard L. Johannesen.HarperCollins Publishers, 1971.
Fisher, Walter R.“Narration as a Human Communication.”Professing the NewRhetorics. Ed. Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc.,1994.
Foucault, M. The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An Introduction. New York: Vintage,1980a.
Forgarty, D. Roots for a New Rhetoric. New York: Russell & Russell Pub., 1959.
Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives onRhetoric. Illinois: Waveland Press, 1985.
Goldberg, Michael. Theology and Narrative: A Critical Introduction. Nashville:Abingdon, 1982.
Golden, James L., Goodwin F. Berquist, and William E. Coleman. The Rhetoric ofWestern Thought. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1983.
Gutt, Ernst-August. Translation and Relevance: Cognitive and Context. 2nd ed.Manchester and Boston: Jt. Jerome Publishing, 2000.
Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture. Anchor Press, 1976.
Halliday, M. A. K., and Ruqaiya Hasan. Language, Context, and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1989.
Hamilton, J. All the News That’s Fit to Sell. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress，2004.
Herrick, James A. The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Boston:Pearson Education, 2005.
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason. Discourse and the Translator. Shanghai ForeignLanguage Education Press, 2001.
Hoey, M. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Hymes, D.“On Communication Competence.”Sociolinguistics. Ed. J. B. Pride, and J.Holmes. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972.
Jakobson, R.“Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics.”Style in Language. Ed. T.A. Sebeok. Mass.: MIT Press, 1960.
Kaufer, David S.“Point of View in Rhetoric Situations: Classical and RomanticContrasts and Contemporary Implications.”Quarterly Journal of Speech 65(1979): 171-86.
Kinneavy, James L.“Kairos: A Neglected Concept in Classical Rhetoric in Rhetoric.”Rhetoric and Praxis: The Contribution of Classical Rhetoric to PracticalReasoning. Ed. Jean Dietz Moss. Washington, DC: Catholic University ofAmerica, 1985: 79-105.
Kristeva, J. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. L.S.Roudiez. Trans. A. Jardine, T.A. Gora, and L.S. Roudiez. Oxford: Blackwell,1980.
Lorenz, A. L., and John Vivian. News: Reporting and Writing. Allyn & Bacon, 1996.
MacIntyre, Alasdair Chalmers. After Virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of NotreDame Press, 1981.
Malinowski, B.“The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages.”Supplement 1.The Meaning of Meaning. C.L. Ogden, and I. A. Richards. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Marchand, Philip. Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger: A Biography.Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.
Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of AdvancedIndustrial Society. Beacon Press, 1964.
McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extension of Man. Routledge andKegan Paul, 1964.
McQuail, Denis. Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. London and BeverlyHills: Sage Publications, 1983.
- - -. Audience Analysis. Sage Publications, 1997.
- - -. McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. 4th ed. London: Sage Publications, 2000.
Mencher, Melvin. News Reporting and Writing. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown CompanyPublishers, 1977.
Moran, Michael G., and Michelle Ballif, eds. Twentieth-Century Rhetorics andRhetoricians: Critical Studies and Sources. Greenwood Press, 2000.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign LanguageEducation Press, 2001.
Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture: Contexts in Translating. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press, 2001.
Nord, Christiane. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functional ApproachesExplained. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Ohmann, Richard.“In Lieu of a New Rhetoric.”Professing the New Rhetorics. Ed.Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
Overington, Micheal A.“Kenneth Burke as Social Theorist.”Sociological Inquiry47.2(1977): 133-41.
Patterson, T. E.“Doing Well and Doing Good: How Soft News and CriticalJournalism are Shrinking the News Audience and Weakening Democracyand What News Outlets Can Do About It (Faculty Research WorkingPaper Series, RWP01-001).”Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School ofGovernment, Harvard University. 2000. 12 Oct. 2010
.
Perelman, CH. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise onArgumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson, and Purcell Weaver. London: Universityof Notre Dame Press, 1969.
- - -. The Realm of Rhetoric. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982.
Pierce, Charles Sanders. Collected Writings. Ed. Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss &Arthur W Burks. 8 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931.
“Propaganda.”Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. Unbridged. Merriam-Webster，2002.
Reiss, Katharina. Translation Criticism: The Potentials & Limitations. Trans. Erroll F.Rhodes. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Richards，I. A., and C. K. Ogden. The Meaning of Meaning. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Ricoeur, Paul. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. FortWorth: Texas Christian Press, 1976.
Saeed, J. I. Semantics. London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1997.
Saussure, Feidinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Trans. Wade Baskin. London:Fontana/Collins, 1974.
Scott, Robert L.“On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic.”Professing the New Rhetorics.Ed. Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
- - -.“On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic: Ten Years Later.”Central States SpeechJournal 27.4(1976): 258-66.
Shaw, R. D.“The Translation Context: Cultural Factors in Translation.”TranslationReview 23 (1987): 25-29.
Sloan, John H.“Understanding McLuhan: Some Implications for the Speech Teacherand Critic.”Communication Education 17.2(1968):140-44.
Sloane, Thomas O., ed. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press, 2001.
Smith, F. L. Perspectives on Radio and Television: Telecommunication in the UnitedStates. New York: Harper and Row, 1985.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.
Stob, Paul.“‘Terministic Screens,’Social Constructionism, and the Language ofExperience: Kenneth Burke’s Utilization of William James.”Philosophy andRhetoric. 41.2(2008): 130-52.
Tibbetts, A. M.“Rhetoric Stance Revisited.”College Composition andCommunication 26.3(1975): 248-52.
Tuchman, G.“Making News by Doing Work: Reutilizing the Unexpected.”AmericanJournal of Sociology 79(1973):110-131.
Van Dijk, T. A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics ofDiscourse. London: Longman, 1977.
- - -. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. 2 vols. London: SagePublications, 1997.
Vatz, Richard E.“The Myth of the Rhetoric Situation.”Philosophy and Rhetoric6(1973): 154-61.
Weaver, M. Richard. The Ethics of Rhetoric. Indiana: Regnery/Gateway, Inc., 1953.
- - -,“Language is Sermonic”. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. 3rd ed. Ed. James L.Golden, Goodwin F. Berquist, and William E. Coleman. Kendall/HuntPublishing Company, 1983.
Whetmore, E. J. Mediamerica: Form, Content and Consequence of MassCommunication. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Willard, Thomas, and Stuart C. Brown.“The One and the Many: Brief History of theDistinction.”A Sense of Audience in Written Communication. Ed. Gesa Kirsch,Duane H. Roen. Sage Publications, Inc, 1990.
Zappen, James P.“Kenneth Burke on Dialectical-Rhetorical Transcendence.”Philosophy & Rhetoric 42(2009): 279-301.
埃里克·麦克卢汉，弗兰克·秦格龙，编.麦克卢汉精粹.南京：南京大学出版社，2000.
布雷恩·S·布鲁克斯等.新闻报道与写作.主译：范红.新华出版社，2007。
曹春玲.“从赖斯的翻译批评理论看英语软新闻标题的汉译”.硕士论文.山东大学，2006.
曹志颖.“浅论软新闻英译中的编译及其理论依据”.湖北第二师范学院学报25.9(2008): 133-5.
——，“软新闻翻译的理论依据及其策略探究”.大连大学学报2(2009): 154-6.
——，“基于‘目的论’的软新闻翻译研究”.硕士论文.西北师范大学，2009.
陈科芳，钱丹阳.“软新闻汉译英的功能派视角”.赤峰学院学报（汉文哲学社会科学版）30.11(2009): 129-30.
陈汝东.“论修辞研究的传播学视角”.湖北师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）24.2(2004): 89-94.
陈望道.修辞学发凡.上海：复旦大学出版社，2009.
陈铮.“从关联理论角度解读软新闻英译”.硕士论文.大连理工大学，2006.
丹尼斯·麦奎尔.受众分析.译者：刘燕南，李颖，杨振荣.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
——，麦奎尔大众传播理论.译者：崔保国，李琨.北京：清华大学出版社，2006.
邓志勇.“修辞学的深刻蕴含——从修辞学与古典辩证法的关系谈起”.外语研究4(2009): 6-11.
丁柏铨.中国新闻理论体系研究.北京：新华出版社，2002.
段连城.对外传播学初探（汉英合编）.北京：中国建设出版社出版，1988.
——，对外传播学初探.增订版.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
方幸福.“编译在软新闻汉译英中的应用”.四川师范学院学报6(2002): 64-7.
高辛勇.修辞学与文学阅读.北京：北京大学出版社，1997.
郭可.“中国英语媒体传播效果研究”.国际新闻界4(2002): 40-5.
——，当代对外传播.上海：复旦大学出版社：2003.
何国平.中国对外报道思想研究.北京：中国传媒大学出版社，2009.
候迎忠，郭光华.对外报道策略与技巧.北京：中国传媒大学出版社，2009.
胡曙中.美国新修辞学研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999.
——，现代英语修辞学.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
——，英汉修辞跨文化研究.青岛：青岛出版社，2008.
——，西方新修辞学概论.湘潭：湘潭大学出版社，2009.
胡圆圆.“从功能派理论看软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.对外经济贸易大学，2004.
卡罗尔·里奇.新闻写作报道训练教程.第3版.译者：钟新.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2004.
肯尼斯﹒博克.“修辞情景”.译者：常宽富.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998: 155-68.
肯尼斯·博克等.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.译者：常昌富，顾宝桐.北京：中国社科出版社，1998.
肯尼斯·博克等.导论.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.作者：常宽富.译者：常昌富，顾宝桐.北京：中国社科出版社，1998.
拉斯韦尔.世界大战中的宣传技巧.译者：张洁，田青.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2003.
乐利文，罗蕾蕾.“从拉斯韦尔的‘五W’模式分析当代美国的国际宣传体制”.东北大学学报4.1（2002）: 56-9.
利昂诺，编. TIME精选阅读与词汇突破.编写：丁大刚，庄晓荣.大连：大连理工大学出版社，2006.
李海明.对外新闻的采访与编辑.北京：中国广播电视出版社，1997.
黎海波.“对外传播中的共同价值观问题初探”.对外传播2（2008）：36-9.
林华.“软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.华中理工大学，2001.
——，“软新闻汉译英方法的探讨”.江汉大学学报21.5(2002): 109-12.
刘建明.当代新闻学原理.北京：清华大学出版社，2003.
“刘康：外宣新思维我们要掌握话语权”.人民网2010年7月22日. 2010年10月8日< http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/196453/196454/12222130.html>.
刘琼.“媒介可信度与媒介公信力概念辨析”.东南传播7(2010): 11-2.
刘亚猛.追求象征的力量.北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2004.
——，西方修辞学史.北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2008.
刘燕南.译者前言.受众分析.作者：丹尼斯·麦奎尔.译者：刘燕南，李颖，杨振荣.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
刘正琰，高名凯等，编.汉语外来语词典.上海：上海辞书出版社，1984.
罗伯特·司各特.“论修辞的认知性：十年之后”.译者：顾宝桐.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.北京：中国社会科学出版社, 1998: 155-68.
麦克卢汉.理解媒介：论人的延伸.译者：何道宽.北京：商务印书馆，2000.
梅蒂·莫利纳罗，科琳·麦克卢汉，威廉·托伊，编.麦克卢汉书简.译者：何道宽，仲冬.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2005.
钱叶萍.“从功能翻译理论看软新闻的汉译英”.北京第二外国语学院学报（外语版）6(2006): 11-4.
沈荟，金璐.“西方传媒公信力的研究视域”.上海大学学报（社会科学版）15.4(2008): 83-89.
沈苏儒.对外报道教程.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
——，对外传播的理论与实践.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
——，“怎样写好对外报道”.对外传播.翻译研究文集.北京：外文出版社，2009:128-33.
——，对外传播.翻译研究文集.北京：外文出版社，2009.
托伊恩·A.梵·迪克.作为话语的新闻.译者：曾庆香.北京：华夏出版社，2003.
王海鹰.“从功能翻译理论看软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.广东外语外贸大学，2009.
王凌.“关联理论视角下的软新闻英译”.硕士论文.天津理工大学，2010.
王晓腾“.从互文性角度探索英语软新闻的汉译”.硕士论文.长春理工大学，2010.
韦恩·布斯.修辞的复兴.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009.
——，“修辞立场”.修辞的复兴：韦恩·布斯精粹.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009a.
——，“修辞学的复兴”.修辞的复兴：韦恩·布斯精粹.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009b.
威尔伯·施拉姆，威廉·波特.传播学概论.译者：李启，周立方.新华出版社，1984.
魏倩倩.“软新闻英译：功能翻译理论视角”.硕士论文.山东大学，2007.
温科学.“美国大学的修辞教育（之一）”.修辞学习2(1999): 15-16.
——，20世纪西方修辞学理论研究.中国社会科学出版社，2006.
——，“当代西方修辞受众研究”.修辞学习5（2007）: 18-20.
吴玲兰.“软新闻英译的功能途径”.硕士论文.中南大学，2007.
“修辞”.辞海. 1999年版.
辛斌.“语言语篇权力”.外语学刊4(2003): 1-6.
——，“福柯的权力论与批评性语篇分析”.外语学刊2(2006): 1-6.
徐泉，王婷“.试论软新闻的翻译方法及其理论依据”.语言与翻译（汉文）3(2001):39-42.
薛婷婷.“软新闻符号学翻译法”.硕士论文.上海外国语大学，2005.
闫辉.“从传播学角度看软新闻的汉译英”.网络财富·民办高校论坛. 2009: 162.
姚爽.“从功能翻译理论谈电视软新闻的汉英翻译”.硕士论文.天津师范大学，2008.
姚喜明，王惠敏.“西方修辞学视域下的受众解读.”宁波大学学报（人文科学版）23.1(2010): 35-9.
余家宏等，编.新闻学词典.杭州：浙江人民出版社，1988.
曾建徽.融冰·搭桥·突围——曾建徽论对外宣传.北京：五洲传播出版社，2006.
张长明.让世界了解中国——电视对外传播40年.海洋出版社，1999.
张桂珍.中国对外传播.北京：北京广播学院出版社，2006.
张基佩.“外宣英译的原文要适当删减”.上海科技翻译3(2001): 21-4.
张健.新闻英语文体与范文评析.第2版.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
张锦.“从关联理论看软新闻编译”.赤峰学院学报（汉文哲学社会科学版）31.3(2010): 155-7.
赵启正.向世界说明中国——赵启正的沟通艺术.新世界出版社，2002.
周竞琪.“功能翻译理论与软新闻英译”.硕士论文.湖南师范大学，2010.
朱穆之.论对外宣传.北京：五洲传播出版社，1995.
朱永生.语境动态研究.北京：北京大学出版社，2005.
庄琴芳.“福柯后现代话语观与中国话语建构”.外语学刊5(2007): 94-6.
9转引自郭可,“中国英语媒体传播效果研究”,国际新闻界4(2002):42。
10候迎忠,郭光华,对外报道策略与技巧,中国传媒大学出版社,2009:113。
11转引自丹尼斯·麦奎尔,受众分析,中国人民出版社,2006:63。
14引自托伊恩·A·梵·迪克,作为话语的新闻,华夏出版社:2003,57。
Aristotle. Rhetoric and Poetic. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts and Ingram Bywater. RandomHouse, Inc., 1954.
Ban, H.“Soft News.”The International Encyclopedia of Communication. Ed. W.Donsbach. Blackwell Publishing: Reference Online. 2008. 12 Oct.2010
Bateson, G. Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. Hampton Press, 1979.
Baum, M. A.“Sex, Lies and War: How Soft News Brings Policy to the InattentivePublic.”American Political Science Review 96.1 (2002): 91-109.
Bell, A. The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell Publication, 1991.
Berg, David.“Rhetoric, Reality, and Mass Media.”Quarterly Journal of Speech58.3(1972): 255-56.
Biesecker, Barbara A.“Rethinking the Rhetorical Situation from Within the Thematicof Difference.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 22.2(1989): 110-30.
Biter, Lloyd.“Rhetoric Situation.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 1(1968): 1-14.
Black, Edwin. Rhetoric Criticism: A Study in Method. New York: The MacmillanCompany, 1965.
Booth, W. C. The Rhetoric of Rhetoric: The Quest for Effective Communication.Blackwell Publishing, 2004.
Brockiede, Wayne E., and D. Ehninger.“Toulmin on Argument: An Interpretation andApplication.”Quarterly Journal of Speech, XLVI(1960)：44-53.
Bryant D. C., and Karl R. Wallace. Fundamentals of Public Speaking. London:Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976.
Buchholz, Ted. Reporting for the Printed Media. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.,1993.
Burke, Kenneth.“Rhetoric---Old and New.”The Journal of General Education,5(1951): 203-209.
- - -. Language as Symbolic Action: Essay on Life, Literature, and Method. Berkeley:University of California Press, 1966.
- - -. A Grammar of Motives. University of California Press, 1969a.
- - -. A Rhetoric of Motives. University of California Press, 1969b.
- - -. Attitudes Toward History. California: University of California Press, 1984.
Campbell, G. The Philosophy of Rhetoic. Southern Illinois University Press, 1963.
Carter, C., and L. Steiner, eds. Critical Reading: Media and Gender. Maidenhead: OpenUniversity Press, 2004.
Chesebro, James W.“Epistemology and Ontology as Dialectical Modes in the Writingsof Kenneth Burke.”Communication Quarterly 36(1988): 175-91.
Ciesielski, Dennis J.“‘Secular Pragmatism’: Kenneth Burke and the Resocializationof Literature and Theory.”Kenneth Burke and the 21st Century. Ed. Bernard L.Brock. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999.
Clausse, R.“The Mass Public at Grips with Mass Communication.”InternationalSocial Science Journal, 20(4): 625-43.
Connor, Ulla. Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-cultural Aspects of Second-languageWriting. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Consigny, Scott.“Rhetoric and Its Situations.”Philosophy and Rhetoric 7(1974): 175-86.
Corbett, E. P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1965.
Crowley, Sharon, and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students.Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1999.
Derrida, Jacques.“Semiology and Grammatology.”Positions. Trans. Alan Bass.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1981.
Dor, D. Intifada Hits the Headlines. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004.
Ehninger, D.“On Systems of Rhetoric.”Professing the New Rhetorics. Ed. TheresaEnos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
Eubanks, Ralph, and Virgil Baker.“Toward an Axiology of Rhetoric.”Contemporary
Theories of Rhetoric: Selected Readings. Ed. Richard L. Johannesen.HarperCollins Publishers, 1971.
Fisher, Walter R.“Narration as a Human Communication.”Professing the NewRhetorics. Ed. Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc.,1994.
Foucault, M. The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An Introduction. New York: Vintage,1980a.
Forgarty, D. Roots for a New Rhetoric. New York: Russell & Russell Pub., 1959.
Foss, Sonja K., Karen A. Foss, and Robert Trapp. Contemporary Perspectives onRhetoric. Illinois: Waveland Press, 1985.
Goldberg, Michael. Theology and Narrative: A Critical Introduction. Nashville:Abingdon, 1982.
Golden, James L., Goodwin F. Berquist, and William E. Coleman. The Rhetoric ofWestern Thought. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1983.
Gutt, Ernst-August. Translation and Relevance: Cognitive and Context. 2nd ed.Manchester and Boston: Jt. Jerome Publishing, 2000.
Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture. Anchor Press, 1976.
Halliday, M. A. K., and Ruqaiya Hasan. Language, Context, and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1989.
Hamilton, J. All the News That’s Fit to Sell. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress，2004.
Herrick, James A. The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Boston:Pearson Education, 2005.
Hatim, Basil, and Ian Mason. Discourse and the Translator. Shanghai ForeignLanguage Education Press, 2001.
Hoey, M. Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Hymes, D.“On Communication Competence.”Sociolinguistics. Ed. J. B. Pride, and J.Holmes. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972.
Jakobson, R.“Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics.”Style in Language. Ed. T.A. Sebeok. Mass.: MIT Press, 1960.
Kaufer, David S.“Point of View in Rhetoric Situations: Classical and RomanticContrasts and Contemporary Implications.”Quarterly Journal of Speech 65(1979): 171-86.
Kinneavy, James L.“Kairos: A Neglected Concept in Classical Rhetoric in Rhetoric.”Rhetoric and Praxis: The Contribution of Classical Rhetoric to PracticalReasoning. Ed. Jean Dietz Moss. Washington, DC: Catholic University ofAmerica, 1985: 79-105.
Kristeva, J. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. L.S.Roudiez. Trans. A. Jardine, T.A. Gora, and L.S. Roudiez. Oxford: Blackwell,1980.
Lorenz, A. L., and John Vivian. News: Reporting and Writing. Allyn & Bacon, 1996.
MacIntyre, Alasdair Chalmers. After Virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of NotreDame Press, 1981.
Malinowski, B.“The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages.”Supplement 1.The Meaning of Meaning. C.L. Ogden, and I. A. Richards. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Marchand, Philip. Marshall McLuhan: The Medium and the Messenger: A Biography.Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998.
Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of AdvancedIndustrial Society. Beacon Press, 1964.
McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extension of Man. Routledge andKegan Paul, 1964.
McQuail, Denis. Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. London and BeverlyHills: Sage Publications, 1983.
- - -. Audience Analysis. Sage Publications, 1997.
- - -. McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. 4th ed. London: Sage Publications, 2000.
Mencher, Melvin. News Reporting and Writing. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown CompanyPublishers, 1977.
Moran, Michael G., and Michelle Ballif, eds. Twentieth-Century Rhetorics andRhetoricians: Critical Studies and Sources. Greenwood Press, 2000.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign LanguageEducation Press, 2001.
Nida, Eugene A. Language and Culture: Contexts in Translating. Shanghai: ShanghaiForeign Language Education Press, 2001.
Nord, Christiane. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functional ApproachesExplained. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2001.
Ohmann, Richard.“In Lieu of a New Rhetoric.”Professing the New Rhetorics. Ed.Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
Overington, Micheal A.“Kenneth Burke as Social Theorist.”Sociological Inquiry47.2(1977): 133-41.
Patterson, T. E.“Doing Well and Doing Good: How Soft News and CriticalJournalism are Shrinking the News Audience and Weakening Democracyand What News Outlets Can Do About It (Faculty Research WorkingPaper Series, RWP01-001).”Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School ofGovernment, Harvard University. 2000. 12 Oct. 2010
Perelman, CH. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise onArgumentation. Trans. John Wilkinson, and Purcell Weaver. London: Universityof Notre Dame Press, 1969.
- - -. The Realm of Rhetoric. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982.
Pierce, Charles Sanders. Collected Writings. Ed. Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss &Arthur W Burks. 8 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931.
“Propaganda.”Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. Unbridged. Merriam-Webster，2002.
Reiss, Katharina. Translation Criticism: The Potentials & Limitations. Trans. Erroll F.Rhodes. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2004.
Richards，I. A., and C. K. Ogden. The Meaning of Meaning. London: Kegan Paul,1923.
Ricoeur, Paul. Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. FortWorth: Texas Christian Press, 1976.
Saeed, J. I. Semantics. London: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1997.
Saussure, Feidinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Trans. Wade Baskin. London:Fontana/Collins, 1974.
Scott, Robert L.“On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic.”Professing the New Rhetorics.Ed. Theresa Enos, and Stuart C. Brown. N. J.: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1994.
- - -.“On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic: Ten Years Later.”Central States SpeechJournal 27.4(1976): 258-66.
Shaw, R. D.“The Translation Context: Cultural Factors in Translation.”TranslationReview 23 (1987): 25-29.
Sloan, John H.“Understanding McLuhan: Some Implications for the Speech Teacherand Critic.”Communication Education 17.2(1968):140-44.
Sloane, Thomas O., ed. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press, 2001.
Smith, F. L. Perspectives on Radio and Television: Telecommunication in the UnitedStates. New York: Harper and Row, 1985.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.
Stob, Paul.“‘Terministic Screens,’Social Constructionism, and the Language ofExperience: Kenneth Burke’s Utilization of William James.”Philosophy andRhetoric. 41.2(2008): 130-52.
Tibbetts, A. M.“Rhetoric Stance Revisited.”College Composition andCommunication 26.3(1975): 248-52.
Tuchman, G.“Making News by Doing Work: Reutilizing the Unexpected.”AmericanJournal of Sociology 79(1973):110-131.
Van Dijk, T. A. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics ofDiscourse. London: Longman, 1977.
- - -. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. 2 vols. London: SagePublications, 1997.
Vatz, Richard E.“The Myth of the Rhetoric Situation.”Philosophy and Rhetoric6(1973): 154-61.
Weaver, M. Richard. The Ethics of Rhetoric. Indiana: Regnery/Gateway, Inc., 1953.
- - -,“Language is Sermonic”. The Rhetoric of Western Thought. 3rd ed. Ed. James L.Golden, Goodwin F. Berquist, and William E. Coleman. Kendall/HuntPublishing Company, 1983.
Whetmore, E. J. Mediamerica: Form, Content and Consequence of MassCommunication. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Willard, Thomas, and Stuart C. Brown.“The One and the Many: Brief History of theDistinction.”A Sense of Audience in Written Communication. Ed. Gesa Kirsch,Duane H. Roen. Sage Publications, Inc, 1990.
Zappen, James P.“Kenneth Burke on Dialectical-Rhetorical Transcendence.”Philosophy & Rhetoric 42(2009): 279-301.
埃里克·麦克卢汉，弗兰克·秦格龙，编.麦克卢汉精粹.南京：南京大学出版社，2000.
布雷恩·S·布鲁克斯等.新闻报道与写作.主译：范红.新华出版社，2007。
曹春玲.“从赖斯的翻译批评理论看英语软新闻标题的汉译”.硕士论文.山东大学，2006.
曹志颖.“浅论软新闻英译中的编译及其理论依据”.湖北第二师范学院学报25.9(2008): 133-5.
——，“软新闻翻译的理论依据及其策略探究”.大连大学学报2(2009): 154-6.
——，“基于‘目的论’的软新闻翻译研究”.硕士论文.西北师范大学，2009.
陈科芳，钱丹阳.“软新闻汉译英的功能派视角”.赤峰学院学报（汉文哲学社会科学版）30.11(2009): 129-30.
陈汝东.“论修辞研究的传播学视角”.湖北师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）24.2(2004): 89-94.
陈望道.修辞学发凡.上海：复旦大学出版社，2009.
陈铮.“从关联理论角度解读软新闻英译”.硕士论文.大连理工大学，2006.
丹尼斯·麦奎尔.受众分析.译者：刘燕南，李颖，杨振荣.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
——，麦奎尔大众传播理论.译者：崔保国，李琨.北京：清华大学出版社，2006.
邓志勇.“修辞学的深刻蕴含——从修辞学与古典辩证法的关系谈起”.外语研究4(2009): 6-11.
丁柏铨.中国新闻理论体系研究.北京：新华出版社，2002.
段连城.对外传播学初探（汉英合编）.北京：中国建设出版社出版，1988.
——，对外传播学初探.增订版.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
方幸福.“编译在软新闻汉译英中的应用”.四川师范学院学报6(2002): 64-7.
高辛勇.修辞学与文学阅读.北京：北京大学出版社，1997.
郭可.“中国英语媒体传播效果研究”.国际新闻界4(2002): 40-5.
——，当代对外传播.上海：复旦大学出版社：2003.
何国平.中国对外报道思想研究.北京：中国传媒大学出版社，2009.
候迎忠，郭光华.对外报道策略与技巧.北京：中国传媒大学出版社，2009.
胡曙中.美国新修辞学研究.上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999.
——，现代英语修辞学.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
——，英汉修辞跨文化研究.青岛：青岛出版社，2008.
——，西方新修辞学概论.湘潭：湘潭大学出版社，2009.
胡圆圆.“从功能派理论看软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.对外经济贸易大学，2004.
卡罗尔·里奇.新闻写作报道训练教程.第3版.译者：钟新.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2004.
肯尼斯﹒博克.“修辞情景”.译者：常宽富.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.北京：中国社会科学出版社，1998: 155-68.
肯尼斯·博克等.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.译者：常昌富，顾宝桐.北京：中国社科出版社，1998.
肯尼斯·博克等.导论.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.作者：常宽富.译者：常昌富，顾宝桐.北京：中国社科出版社，1998.
拉斯韦尔.世界大战中的宣传技巧.译者：张洁，田青.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2003.
乐利文，罗蕾蕾.“从拉斯韦尔的‘五W’模式分析当代美国的国际宣传体制”.东北大学学报4.1（2002）: 56-9.
利昂诺，编. TIME精选阅读与词汇突破.编写：丁大刚，庄晓荣.大连：大连理工大学出版社，2006.
李海明.对外新闻的采访与编辑.北京：中国广播电视出版社，1997.
黎海波.“对外传播中的共同价值观问题初探”.对外传播2（2008）：36-9.
林华.“软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.华中理工大学，2001.
——，“软新闻汉译英方法的探讨”.江汉大学学报21.5(2002): 109-12.
刘建明.当代新闻学原理.北京：清华大学出版社，2003.
“刘康：外宣新思维我们要掌握话语权”.人民网2010年7月22日. 2010年10月8日< http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/196453/196454/12222130.html>.
刘琼.“媒介可信度与媒介公信力概念辨析”.东南传播7(2010): 11-2.
刘亚猛.追求象征的力量.北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2004.
——，西方修辞学史.北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2008.
刘燕南.译者前言.受众分析.作者：丹尼斯·麦奎尔.译者：刘燕南，李颖，杨振荣.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2006.
刘正琰，高名凯等，编.汉语外来语词典.上海：上海辞书出版社，1984.
罗伯特·司各特.“论修辞的认知性：十年之后”.译者：顾宝桐.当代西方修辞学：演讲与话语批评.北京：中国社会科学出版社, 1998: 155-68.
麦克卢汉.理解媒介：论人的延伸.译者：何道宽.北京：商务印书馆，2000.
梅蒂·莫利纳罗，科琳·麦克卢汉，威廉·托伊，编.麦克卢汉书简.译者：何道宽，仲冬.北京：中国人民大学出版社，2005.
钱叶萍.“从功能翻译理论看软新闻的汉译英”.北京第二外国语学院学报（外语版）6(2006): 11-4.
沈荟，金璐.“西方传媒公信力的研究视域”.上海大学学报（社会科学版）15.4(2008): 83-89.
沈苏儒.对外报道教程.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
——，对外传播的理论与实践.北京：五洲传播出版社，2004.
——，“怎样写好对外报道”.对外传播.翻译研究文集.北京：外文出版社，2009:128-33.
——，对外传播.翻译研究文集.北京：外文出版社，2009.
托伊恩·A.梵·迪克.作为话语的新闻.译者：曾庆香.北京：华夏出版社，2003.
王海鹰.“从功能翻译理论看软新闻的汉译英”.硕士论文.广东外语外贸大学，2009.
王凌.“关联理论视角下的软新闻英译”.硕士论文.天津理工大学，2010.
王晓腾“.从互文性角度探索英语软新闻的汉译”.硕士论文.长春理工大学，2010.
韦恩·布斯.修辞的复兴.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009.
——，“修辞立场”.修辞的复兴：韦恩·布斯精粹.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009a.
——，“修辞学的复兴”.修辞的复兴：韦恩·布斯精粹.译者：穆雷等.南京：译林出版社，2009b.
威尔伯·施拉姆，威廉·波特.传播学概论.译者：李启，周立方.新华出版社，1984.
魏倩倩.“软新闻英译：功能翻译理论视角”.硕士论文.山东大学，2007.
温科学.“美国大学的修辞教育（之一）”.修辞学习2(1999): 15-16.
——，20世纪西方修辞学理论研究.中国社会科学出版社，2006.
——，“当代西方修辞受众研究”.修辞学习5（2007）: 18-20.
吴玲兰.“软新闻英译的功能途径”.硕士论文.中南大学，2007.
“修辞”.辞海. 1999年版.
辛斌.“语言语篇权力”.外语学刊4(2003): 1-6.
——，“福柯的权力论与批评性语篇分析”.外语学刊2(2006): 1-6.
徐泉，王婷“.试论软新闻的翻译方法及其理论依据”.语言与翻译（汉文）3(2001):39-42.
薛婷婷.“软新闻符号学翻译法”.硕士论文.上海外国语大学，2005.
闫辉.“从传播学角度看软新闻的汉译英”.网络财富·民办高校论坛. 2009: 162.
姚爽.“从功能翻译理论谈电视软新闻的汉英翻译”.硕士论文.天津师范大学，2008.
姚喜明，王惠敏.“西方修辞学视域下的受众解读.”宁波大学学报（人文科学版）23.1(2010): 35-9.
余家宏等，编.新闻学词典.杭州：浙江人民出版社，1988.
曾建徽.融冰·搭桥·突围——曾建徽论对外宣传.北京：五洲传播出版社，2006.
张长明.让世界了解中国——电视对外传播40年.海洋出版社，1999.
张桂珍.中国对外传播.北京：北京广播学院出版社，2006.
张基佩.“外宣英译的原文要适当删减”.上海科技翻译3(2001): 21-4.
张健.新闻英语文体与范文评析.第2版.上海：上海外语教育出版社，2004.
张锦.“从关联理论看软新闻编译”.赤峰学院学报（汉文哲学社会科学版）31.3(2010): 155-7.
赵启正.向世界说明中国——赵启正的沟通艺术.新世界出版社，2002.
周竞琪.“功能翻译理论与软新闻英译”.硕士论文.湖南师范大学，2010.
朱穆之.论对外宣传.北京：五洲传播出版社，1995.
朱永生.语境动态研究.北京：北京大学出版社，2005.
庄琴芳.“福柯后现代话语观与中国话语建构”.外语学刊5(2007): 94-6.