批评话语分析中的话语策略研究——以《纽约时报》报道“一带一路”为例
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Research on Discourse Strategy in Critical Discourse Analysis——Taking New York Times' Reporting on “One Belt and One Road” as an Example
  • 作者:陈钦 ; 林丽珍
  • 英文作者:Chen Qin;Lin Lizhen;Zhicheng College Fuzhou University;
  • 关键词:话语策略 ; CDA ; “一带一路”
  • 英文关键词:discourse strategy;;CDA(Critical Discourse Analysis);;"One Belt and One Road"
  • 中文刊名:BHGS
  • 英文刊名:Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology(Social Sciences Edition)
  • 机构:福州大学至诚学院;
  • 出版日期:2018-12-15
  • 出版单位:北京化工大学学报(社会科学版)
  • 年:2018
  • 期:No.105
  • 基金:2016年福建省社会科学规划项目青年项目“基于隐喻架构的中美媒体‘一带一路’报道对比与中国话语权构建”研究(FJ2016C152)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:BHGS201804011
  • 页数:8
  • CN:04
  • ISSN:11-4741/C
  • 分类号:70-77
摘要
从认知视角研究CDA已成为热点之一,宏观上有van Dijk的社会认知模式,微观上有Hart的策略理论。从van Dijk的模式中可发现,《纽约时报》对"一带一路"的报道凸显出中国的消极他者影响,体现了其意识形态;Hart从EP和CLA视角对《纽约时报》所报道的"一带一路"的语篇进行微观分析,发现其意识形态操控隐性地体现在话语策略中。《纽约时报》主要借力指称策略、述谓策略和框架化策略,制造各种有关中国的带有威胁性的消极影响的言论,以阻碍"一带一路"的国际传播。对实现意识形态的话语策略的微观解读进一步验证了批评话语分析与认知语言学融合的可能性。
        From the perspective of cognition, the study of CDA has become one of the hotspots. On the macro level, there is van Dijk's social cognition model, and on the micro level, there is Hart's strategy theory. According to the model of van Dijk, the New York Times' coverage of the "One Belt and One Road" highlights the negative influence of China and its ideology. According to the research of Hart from the perspective of EP and CLA., this paper makes a microscopic analysis of New York Times' reporting on "one Belt and one Road" and finds that the manipulation of ideology is implicit in the discourse strategies, which mainly include reference strategies,predication strategies and framing strategies. The New York Times' mainly relies on alleged strategies, narration strategies, and framework strategies to create a variety of statements about China's threatening negative effects,hindering the international spread of the "One Belt and One Road" initiative. The microscopic interpretation of the discourse strategy of achieving ideology further verifies the possibility of the integration of critical discourse analysis and cognitive linguistics.
引文
[1][2][11][荷]托伊恩·A.·梵·迪克.作为话语的新闻[M].曾庆香,译.北京:华夏出版社,2003:87,16,187.
    [3]樊亚平,丁丽琼.软性新闻中的意识形态构建---基于日本产经新闻网莫言获诺奖报道的话语分析[J].兰州大学学报(社会科学版),2013(11):6-12.
    [4]王辉,贾文娟.国外媒体看“一带一路”[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2016:58-91.
    [5]黄爱萍,李希光.影响美国媒体如何报道中国的主要因素---对美国媒体如何塑造中国国家形象的分析[J].中国记者,2002(3):45.
    [6]郑华,李婧.美国媒体构建下的“一带一路”战略构想---基于《纽约时报》和《华盛顿邮报》相关报道的分析[J].上海对外经贸大学学报,2016(1):89-96.
    [7]马建英.美国对中国“一带一路”倡议的认知与反应[J].世界经济与政治,2015(10):104-160.
    [8]周萃,康健.美国主流媒体如何为“一带一路”构建媒介框架[J].现代传播,2016(6):164.
    [9]黄俊,董小玉.“一带一路”国家战略的传播困境及突围策略[J].马克思主义研究,2015(12):123.
    [10]辛斌.批评语言学:理论与应用[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,2005:83-84.
    [12][20]张天伟.政治领导人演讲的话语体系构建研究---基于近体化理论的案例分析[J].学术探索,2016(9):29-30.
    [13][14]VAN DIJK T A.Opinions and Ideologies in The Press[A].In BELLA,GARRET P(eds.).Approaches to Media Discourse[C].Oxford:Blackwell,1998:62,32.
    [15][16][17][19][29][30][32][34][35][37][39][43][49]HART C.Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science:New Perspectives on immigration Discourse[M].Basingstoke:Palgrave,2010:73,53,60,189,49,32,56-57,133,63,70,73-79,127,121.
    [18][24]HART C.Construal Operation on Online Press Reports of Political Protests[A].In HART C,CAP P(eds.).Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies[C].London:Bloomsbury,2014:40,174.
    [21][23]CHILTON P A.Analysing Political Discourse:Theory and Practice[M].London:Routledge,2004:46,48.
    [22]CAP P.Proximisation:The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing[M].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2013:36.
    [25]FILLMORE C.Frame Semantics[A].In Linguistics Society of Korea(eds.).Linguistics in the Morning Calm[C].Seoul:Hanshin Publishing Co.,1982:111.
    [26]SCHALLER M,NEUBERG S.Intergroup Prejudices and Intergroup Conflicts[A].In CRAWFORD C,KREBS D(eds.).Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology[C].Mahwah NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,2008:405.
    [27]REISIG M,WODAR R.Discourse and Discrimination:Rhetorics of Racism and Anti-Semitism[M].London:Routledge,2001:30.
    [28]WODAK R.The Discourse-historical Approach[A].In WODAK R,MEYER M.(eds.).Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis[C].London:Sage,2001:63-94.
    [31]陈鹤三.再论批评话语分析的认知层面[J].外语研究,2011(4):23-29.
    [33]FOWLER R.Language in The News:Discourse and Ideology in The Press[M].London:Routledge,1991:16.
    [36]VAN DIJK T A.Political Discourse and Political Cognition[A].In CHILTON PA,CHAFFNER C.Politics as Text and Talk:Analytic Approaches to Political Discourse[C].Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2002:232.
    [38]VAN LEEUWEN T.The Representation of Social Actors[A].In CALDAS-COULTHARD C R,COULTHARD M(eds.).Texts and Practices:Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis[C].London:Routledge,1996:32-70.
    [40][42]WODAK R.The discourse-historical approach[A].In WODAK R,MEYER M(eds.).Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis[C].London:Sage,2001:63,75.
    [41]张天伟.基于进化心理学的批评话语研究[J].外语与外语教学,2016(5):79.
    [44]HART C.Critical Discourse Analysis and Metaphor:Towards a TheoreticalFramework[J].Critical Discourse Studies,2008(2):105.
    [45][46]CHILTON P A.Security Metaphors:Cold War Discourse From Containment to Common House[M].New York:Peter Lang,1996:74,154.
    [47][48]WOLF HG,POLZENHAGEN F.Conceptual Metaphor as Ideological Stylistic Means:An Exemplary Analysis[A].In DIRVEN R,FRANK R,PUTZ M(eds.).Cognitive Models in Language and Thought:Ideology,Metaphors and Meanings[C].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,2003:262,263.

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700