从西方修辞学角度重新解读韩非子的修辞思想
|
摘要
长久以来,由于西方修辞学在整个修辞学界占据着领先地位,学者们往往热衷于探索和挖掘西方修辞学传统而忽略了非西方修辞学包括中国修辞学的传统。而事实上,非西方修辞学也蕴含着丰富多彩的修辞思想,是修辞学研究中不可或缺的重要组成部分,中国修辞传统就是其中一个典型的例子。早在先秦时期,中国就萌发了不少具有深度的修辞观念,出现了许多杰出的修辞学家,韩非子是其中尤其引人注目的一位。
当代学者对于韩非子的研究不胜枚举,然而多数从政治、哲学角度入手。而有关修辞方面的研究,也主要集中于语言特色、艺术风格、谏说形式等方面,对韩非子修辞思想的系统性研究是少之又少,这与韩非子精深独特的修辞思想及其在修辞学中的真正价值是很不相称的。
本文将从当代国际主流修辞思想即西方修辞学的角度,对韩非子的修辞思想进行重新解读,以期激发更多学者从事本课题的研究。通过韩非子这个典型范例,我们不仅能加深国际学术界对中国修辞传统的理解,同时也有助于提高这一传统在世界修辞研究中的地位,并且对现有的关于跨文化修辞的观点做出补充。
全文采用多种研究方法。从总体上说,文章构筑了一个中西方修辞学相互比较和对比的框架,在这个框架内通过对韩非作品的仔细研读,对其中蕴含的修辞思想进行了详细的分析和总结。这个新解读包含两部分内容:一是韩非子对修辞的总体看法,二是韩非子的说服理论。通过对这两个方面的审视,本文表明韩非子是个出类拔萃的修辞学家,他的修辞学思想很有深度,许多看法跟当代修辞学家的观点有惊人相似之处和异曲同工之妙。
For reasons not difficult to find, the Western tradition of rhetoric has been drawing the greatest attention in international studies of human discourse, while those of non-Western cultures are often ignored. Yet non-Western rhetorical traditions are just as rich and insightful as their Western counterpart, and deserve just as important a position in rhetorical studies. A case in point is the Chinese tradition. Up to the Pre-qin period in the Chinese history, the Chinese had early reached a high level of sophistication in rhetorical thinking, and among them one finds a host of brilliant rhetoricians, of whom Han Feizi is one of the most representative and the greatest.
Although there have been many existing researches on Han Feizi, most of which, however, are made from political and philosophical perspectives, and even the few researches made from a rhetorical perspective tend to focus on literary features and linguistic techniques only, while it is rare to find researches on Han's rhetorical thoughts as a whole and there has been a mismatch as a result between the abundance of Han's rhetorical thinking and the recognition he has received.
In view of this situation, this thesis undertakes to reinterpret Han Feizi's thoughts from a broadly based rhetorical perspective. The goals we intend to fulfill are four-fold: to inspire more scholarly interests in the study of Han Feizi's rhetorical thoughts which have long been ignored; to get a better understanding of Chinese rhetorical tradition by offering a more comprehensive profile of one of its greatest figures; to enhance the Chinese tradition's status in the study of human rhetoric as a whole; and finally, to contribute to a cross-cultural vision of rhetoric.
To this end, we adopt a combination of methodologies. A more accommodative interpretive framework is constructed on the basis of a careful comparison and contrast between the western and the Chinese cultural and rhetorical traditions. Within this context, we conduct a detailed textual analysis of Han Feizi's works.
Deriving insights from Western rhetorical perspectives, this paper throws light on Han Feizi's rhetorical thoughts on two aspects in particular: Han's general understanding of rhetoric and his theory of persuasion. On these two aspects, Han Feizi impresses us with his level of sophistication in rhetoric and distinguishes himself as a great rhetorician. Some of his rhetorical thoughts are so ahead of his time as to bear amazing similarities to modern understandings of discourse.
当代学者对于韩非子的研究不胜枚举,然而多数从政治、哲学角度入手。而有关修辞方面的研究,也主要集中于语言特色、艺术风格、谏说形式等方面,对韩非子修辞思想的系统性研究是少之又少,这与韩非子精深独特的修辞思想及其在修辞学中的真正价值是很不相称的。
本文将从当代国际主流修辞思想即西方修辞学的角度,对韩非子的修辞思想进行重新解读,以期激发更多学者从事本课题的研究。通过韩非子这个典型范例,我们不仅能加深国际学术界对中国修辞传统的理解,同时也有助于提高这一传统在世界修辞研究中的地位,并且对现有的关于跨文化修辞的观点做出补充。
全文采用多种研究方法。从总体上说,文章构筑了一个中西方修辞学相互比较和对比的框架,在这个框架内通过对韩非作品的仔细研读,对其中蕴含的修辞思想进行了详细的分析和总结。这个新解读包含两部分内容:一是韩非子对修辞的总体看法,二是韩非子的说服理论。通过对这两个方面的审视,本文表明韩非子是个出类拔萃的修辞学家,他的修辞学思想很有深度,许多看法跟当代修辞学家的观点有惊人相似之处和异曲同工之妙。
For reasons not difficult to find, the Western tradition of rhetoric has been drawing the greatest attention in international studies of human discourse, while those of non-Western cultures are often ignored. Yet non-Western rhetorical traditions are just as rich and insightful as their Western counterpart, and deserve just as important a position in rhetorical studies. A case in point is the Chinese tradition. Up to the Pre-qin period in the Chinese history, the Chinese had early reached a high level of sophistication in rhetorical thinking, and among them one finds a host of brilliant rhetoricians, of whom Han Feizi is one of the most representative and the greatest.
Although there have been many existing researches on Han Feizi, most of which, however, are made from political and philosophical perspectives, and even the few researches made from a rhetorical perspective tend to focus on literary features and linguistic techniques only, while it is rare to find researches on Han's rhetorical thoughts as a whole and there has been a mismatch as a result between the abundance of Han's rhetorical thinking and the recognition he has received.
In view of this situation, this thesis undertakes to reinterpret Han Feizi's thoughts from a broadly based rhetorical perspective. The goals we intend to fulfill are four-fold: to inspire more scholarly interests in the study of Han Feizi's rhetorical thoughts which have long been ignored; to get a better understanding of Chinese rhetorical tradition by offering a more comprehensive profile of one of its greatest figures; to enhance the Chinese tradition's status in the study of human rhetoric as a whole; and finally, to contribute to a cross-cultural vision of rhetoric.
To this end, we adopt a combination of methodologies. A more accommodative interpretive framework is constructed on the basis of a careful comparison and contrast between the western and the Chinese cultural and rhetorical traditions. Within this context, we conduct a detailed textual analysis of Han Feizi's works.
Deriving insights from Western rhetorical perspectives, this paper throws light on Han Feizi's rhetorical thoughts on two aspects in particular: Han's general understanding of rhetoric and his theory of persuasion. On these two aspects, Han Feizi impresses us with his level of sophistication in rhetoric and distinguishes himself as a great rhetorician. Some of his rhetorical thoughts are so ahead of his time as to bear amazing similarities to modern understandings of discourse.
引文
Andrews,James R.& Leff,Michael C.& Terrill,Robert.1998.Reading Rhetorical Texts:An Introduction to Criticism.Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company.
Berlin,James A.1994.Revisionary Histories of Rhetoric:Politics,Power,and Plurality,Eds.Victor Vitanza.Writing Histories of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press.
Billig,Michael.1991.Ideology and Opinion.London:Sage.
Burke,Kenneth.1969.A Rhetoric of Motives.Berkeley:University of California Press.
Campbell,George.1988.The Philosophy of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press.
Cicero,Marcus Tullius.Translated by H.M.Hubbell.1994.Orator.Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
Conley,Thomas M.1990.Rhetoric in the European Tradition.Chicago/London:The University of Chicago Press.
Covino,William.A.and David A.Jolliffe.1995.Rhetoric:Concepts,Definitions,Boundaries.Needham Heights:Allyn and Bacon.
Foss,Sonja K.1996.Rhetorical Criticism:Exploration & Practice.Illinois:Waveland Press.
Foss,Sonja.K,Karen A.Foss and Robert Trapp,eds.2002.Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric.Prospect Heights:Waveland Press,Inc.
Garrett,Mary.1993.Classical Chinese Conceptions of Argumentation and Persuasion.Argumentation and Advocacy:29:105-15.
Herrick,James A.2001.The History and Theory of Rhetoric.Needham Heights:Allyn & Bacon.
Jensen,Vernon.1992.Values and practices in Asian Argumentation.Argumentation and Advocacy:28:155-66.
Kennedy,George A.1998.Comparative Rhetoric:An Historical and Cross-Cultural Introduction.New York:Oxford University Press
Kennedy,George A.1991.Aristotle On Rhetoric.A Theory of Civic Discourse,newly translated with Introduction.Notes,and Appendixes.New York/Oxford:Oxford University Press
Lanham,Richard.1993.The Electronic Word:Democracy,Techonlygy,and the Arts.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Liao,W.K.(trans.).1939.The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu,Vol.1&2.London:Arthur Probsthain.
Liu,Yameng.2004.Nothing Can Be Accomplished If the Speech Does Not Sound Agreeable:Rhetoric and the Invention of Classical Chinese Discourse.Eds.Carol Lipson & Roberta Binkley.Rhetoric Before and Bevond the Greeks.New York:SUNNY.147-164.
Liu,Yameng.1996.To Capture the Essence of Chinese Rhetoric:An Anatomy of a Paradigm in Comparative Rhetoric.Rhetoric Review.14:318-35.
Liu,Yameng.1996.Three Issues in the Argumentative Conception of Early Chinese Discourse.Philosophy East and West,46,1:33-58.
Lu,Xing.1998.Rhetoric in Ancient China,Fifth to Third Centrey B.C.E.:A Comparison with Classical Greek Rhetoric.Columbia:University of South Carolina Press.
Mao,Luming.2003.Reflective Encounters:Illustrating Comparative Rhetoric.Style 37(Winter):401-25
Oliver,Robert T.1971.Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China,New York:Syracuse University Press
Perelman,Chaim & Lucy Olbrecht Tyteca.1969.The New Rhetoric.A Treatise on Argumentation.Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press.
Romilly,Jacqueline de.1975.Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece.Cambridge,MA:Harward University Press.
Sevitch,Benjamin.2005.Speaking in Public:A Global Perspective.Shanghai:Fudan University Press.
Waley,Arthur.1939.Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China.New York:Stanford University Press.
Watson,Burton.1964.Han Feizi:Basic Writings,New York:Columbia University Press.
Chen Bingcai[陈秉才],2007,《韩非子》。北京:中华书局。
Gu Fang[谷方],1996,《韩非与中国文化》。贵阳:贵州人民出版社。
Guo Moruo[郭沫若],1959,《十批判书》。北京:科学出版社。
Hu Shuzhong[胡曙中],2005,《现代英语修辞学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
Liu Kun[刘坤],et.al.,2003.《韩非子译注》。哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社。
Liu Yameng[刘亚猛],2004,《追求象征的力量—关于西方修辞思想的思考》。北京:生活.读书.新知三联书店。
Liu Yongkai[刘永凯],2000.评韩非子的《说难》,《零陵师范高等专科学校学报》。4:17-19。
Si Maqian[司马迁].1982,《史记老子韩非列传第三》。北京:中华书局。
Tan Jiaiian[谭家健].1986,韩非子寓言故事的特色,《河北学刊》,1:78-82。
Wang,Dianji[汪奠基],1981,韩非的形名辩说形式,《社会科学战线》,2:46-57。
Wang Yu[王珏],Hu Xinsheng[胡新生],2005,试论《韩非子·说难》的反讽性质,《东岳论丛》,3:129-134。
Wei Desheng[魏德胜],1995,《韩非子语言研究》。北京:北京语言学院出版社。
Xu Keqiang[徐克强],2004,试论《韩非子》的谏说艺术,《廊坊师范学院学报》,1:61-65。
Yan Xiaofei[闫笑非],2005,韩非散文特色简论,《辽宁大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,33,6:53-57。
Yang Ling[杨玲],2004,试论《韩非子》散文结构对其美学思想的表现,《甘肃社会科学》,5:66-67,124。
Zhao Xueqing[赵学清],2004,《韩非子同义词研究》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
Zheng Ziyu[郑子瑜],Zong Tinghu[宗庭虎],1998。《中国修辞学通史》。长春:吉林教育出版社。
Berlin,James A.1994.Revisionary Histories of Rhetoric:Politics,Power,and Plurality,Eds.Victor Vitanza.Writing Histories of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press.
Billig,Michael.1991.Ideology and Opinion.London:Sage.
Burke,Kenneth.1969.A Rhetoric of Motives.Berkeley:University of California Press.
Campbell,George.1988.The Philosophy of Rhetoric.Carbondale:Southern Illinois University Press.
Cicero,Marcus Tullius.Translated by H.M.Hubbell.1994.Orator.Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
Conley,Thomas M.1990.Rhetoric in the European Tradition.Chicago/London:The University of Chicago Press.
Covino,William.A.and David A.Jolliffe.1995.Rhetoric:Concepts,Definitions,Boundaries.Needham Heights:Allyn and Bacon.
Foss,Sonja K.1996.Rhetorical Criticism:Exploration & Practice.Illinois:Waveland Press.
Foss,Sonja.K,Karen A.Foss and Robert Trapp,eds.2002.Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric.Prospect Heights:Waveland Press,Inc.
Garrett,Mary.1993.Classical Chinese Conceptions of Argumentation and Persuasion.Argumentation and Advocacy:29:105-15.
Herrick,James A.2001.The History and Theory of Rhetoric.Needham Heights:Allyn & Bacon.
Jensen,Vernon.1992.Values and practices in Asian Argumentation.Argumentation and Advocacy:28:155-66.
Kennedy,George A.1998.Comparative Rhetoric:An Historical and Cross-Cultural Introduction.New York:Oxford University Press
Kennedy,George A.1991.Aristotle On Rhetoric.A Theory of Civic Discourse,newly translated with Introduction.Notes,and Appendixes.New York/Oxford:Oxford University Press
Lanham,Richard.1993.The Electronic Word:Democracy,Techonlygy,and the Arts.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Liao,W.K.(trans.).1939.The Complete Works of Han Fei Tzu,Vol.1&2.London:Arthur Probsthain.
Liu,Yameng.2004.Nothing Can Be Accomplished If the Speech Does Not Sound Agreeable:Rhetoric and the Invention of Classical Chinese Discourse.Eds.Carol Lipson & Roberta Binkley.Rhetoric Before and Bevond the Greeks.New York:SUNNY.147-164.
Liu,Yameng.1996.To Capture the Essence of Chinese Rhetoric:An Anatomy of a Paradigm in Comparative Rhetoric.Rhetoric Review.14:318-35.
Liu,Yameng.1996.Three Issues in the Argumentative Conception of Early Chinese Discourse.Philosophy East and West,46,1:33-58.
Lu,Xing.1998.Rhetoric in Ancient China,Fifth to Third Centrey B.C.E.:A Comparison with Classical Greek Rhetoric.Columbia:University of South Carolina Press.
Mao,Luming.2003.Reflective Encounters:Illustrating Comparative Rhetoric.Style 37(Winter):401-25
Oliver,Robert T.1971.Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China,New York:Syracuse University Press
Perelman,Chaim & Lucy Olbrecht Tyteca.1969.The New Rhetoric.A Treatise on Argumentation.Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press.
Romilly,Jacqueline de.1975.Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece.Cambridge,MA:Harward University Press.
Sevitch,Benjamin.2005.Speaking in Public:A Global Perspective.Shanghai:Fudan University Press.
Waley,Arthur.1939.Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China.New York:Stanford University Press.
Watson,Burton.1964.Han Feizi:Basic Writings,New York:Columbia University Press.
Chen Bingcai[陈秉才],2007,《韩非子》。北京:中华书局。
Gu Fang[谷方],1996,《韩非与中国文化》。贵阳:贵州人民出版社。
Guo Moruo[郭沫若],1959,《十批判书》。北京:科学出版社。
Hu Shuzhong[胡曙中],2005,《现代英语修辞学》。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
Liu Kun[刘坤],et.al.,2003.《韩非子译注》。哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社。
Liu Yameng[刘亚猛],2004,《追求象征的力量—关于西方修辞思想的思考》。北京:生活.读书.新知三联书店。
Liu Yongkai[刘永凯],2000.评韩非子的《说难》,《零陵师范高等专科学校学报》。4:17-19。
Si Maqian[司马迁].1982,《史记老子韩非列传第三》。北京:中华书局。
Tan Jiaiian[谭家健].1986,韩非子寓言故事的特色,《河北学刊》,1:78-82。
Wang,Dianji[汪奠基],1981,韩非的形名辩说形式,《社会科学战线》,2:46-57。
Wang Yu[王珏],Hu Xinsheng[胡新生],2005,试论《韩非子·说难》的反讽性质,《东岳论丛》,3:129-134。
Wei Desheng[魏德胜],1995,《韩非子语言研究》。北京:北京语言学院出版社。
Xu Keqiang[徐克强],2004,试论《韩非子》的谏说艺术,《廊坊师范学院学报》,1:61-65。
Yan Xiaofei[闫笑非],2005,韩非散文特色简论,《辽宁大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,33,6:53-57。
Yang Ling[杨玲],2004,试论《韩非子》散文结构对其美学思想的表现,《甘肃社会科学》,5:66-67,124。
Zhao Xueqing[赵学清],2004,《韩非子同义词研究》。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
Zheng Ziyu[郑子瑜],Zong Tinghu[宗庭虎],1998。《中国修辞学通史》。长春:吉林教育出版社。