摘要
本篇论文主要围绕对英语科技新闻语篇的批评性分析展开讨论。
文章首先简要地介绍了批评性语篇分析的定义，并指出此种分析方法旨在透过表面的语言形式，从语言学、社会学、心理学和传播学的角度揭示意识形态、语篇和社会的关系。本文没有将意识形态界定为传统意义上的“虚假的信仰体系”(马克思)，而是采用了范迪克(van Dijk)的定义，认为“意识形态是某一社会团体的成员所共有的信仰体系。”作为该团体一切社会表征的认知基础，意识形态决定和影响了成员个体对某一事件的观点、态度以及所形成的对此事件的心理模式。而这种心理模式与相应的语境模式相结合，从而最终控制着各种社会实践，其中包括语篇的生成以及对语篇的理解。
意识形态的社会功能表现在两个方面。从微观社会交际的角度看，意识形态渗透于各个团体成员的日常行为与交际中，并因此影响甚至支配其各种社会实践。而另一方面，从宏观的角度看，意识形态意义对某种社会过程起着介入或干预作用，主要表现为帮助获得或维护或颠覆某种权力关系。
为了便于对科技新闻语篇进行批评性分析，笔者阐述了科技新闻的意识形态。同其他类型的新闻报道一样，科技新闻也不是绝对客观公正的，在西方发达的资本主义社会，它受着各种政治集团和权力集团的利益驱动。许多英语新闻语篇看似客观公正，实则含而不露地表达各种意识形态意义，对读者产生着潜移默化的作用。而且一定程度上说，科技新闻更容易受到政府科技部门、科技厂商以及科技社团的影响，从而在语篇中体现其意识形态以及某种社会结构和权力关系。
文章随后重点介绍了意识形态是如何影响和决定语篇结构的。按照范迪克的理论，多数受意识形态支配的语篇在描述某一事件时，总是强调对作者所属的团体有利，而对在意识形态上相对立的一方不利的信息；同时，对于人有利，于己不利的信息则避而不谈，或者以其他方式使其不被读者所注意。根据这一原则，笔者选取了一些最易受意识形态影响的语言特性，并分别从文本结构、语义、句法、词汇及修辞等五个方面具体分析了如何透过这些语言结构揭示其背后隐藏的意识形态。
为了使读者对批评性语篇分析的具体方法有一个更直观的认识，文章选取了一篇美联社记者采写的科技新闻，并对其进行了较为详细的分析。首先，
通过分析语言特性表明了此新闻所反映的意识形态，然后联系事件发生的社
会背景，从中揭示出语篇背后所隐藏的种种社会关系。
本文旨在向读者初步地介绍批评性语篇分析的基本知识，并且希望能够
对英语新闻，尤其是科技新闻的教学有一定的启发和促进作用。
This thesis is about the analysis of English science news discourse from the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CD A).
The first part is contributed to a general introduction and a literature review of CDA. CDA refers to the use of an ensemble of techniques for the study of discourse and language use as social and cultural practices. It focuses on issues of ideology, and the discursive processes of its enactment, concealment and reproduction by texts.
Distinguished from other CDA theories derived from functional tradition, the theory proposed in this paper speaks of ideology in a combined sense of being at the same time cognitive and social. Following the reasoning of Teun van Dijk, the second part starts with a multidisciplinary definition of ideology, according to which ideologies are the basic beliefs that form the basis of the social representations of a group. The fundamental propositions of ideologies monitor the acquisition of group knowledge and attitudes, and hence indirectly monitor the mental models that group members form about social events. These models are the representations that control social practices, including the production and comprehension of discourse.
The thesis then examines the ways discourses express, confirm, instantiate or constitute ideologies. It is discussed that in production and comprehension of discourse, ideologies usually operate at first indirectly through group members' ideologically biased mental models of social events. These personal representations of events then interact with (possibly also ideologically biased) context models that construe a communicative situation. And both kinds of models will finally give rise to the ongoing production of ideological text and talk.
Within the multidisciplinary theory of CDA, the thesis also links ideologies with social practices and discourse, at the micro-level of social interactions, on the one hand; and with groups, institutions, organizations, and group relations (esp. power and dominance), at the macro level, on the other hand. Ideologies imbue in many of everyday social practices of individuals, most significantly in discourse.
As soon as people act as members of social groups, they are likely to bear their ideologies in their actions and interactions. And ideologies function at macro level as the mental dimension of either the power of dominant groups over dominated groups, or the resistance of the dominated to the dominant. They provide the principles by which these forms of power abuse or resistance may be justified, legitimized or accepted.
The final objective of the thesis is the analysis of English science news ideologically. Like any other forms of media discourse, science news report also relates itself to its own institutional and economic circumstances. And it seems to be even more easily affected by political, commercial or scientific institutions and organizations. Hence, a piece of science news is usually written in favor of interests of certain groups, such as government officials in charge of science and technology policies, commercial enterprises concerned with high-tech products, and scientists themselves, etc, and thus may imply their ideologies.
The last two parts are devoted to explain in detail how ideologies may influence the structures of discourse. According to van Dijk, the overall strategy of most ideological discourses is to emphasize positive things of ingroups and negative things of outgroups. The writer thus selects some linguistic elements that are most easily orientated by ideology, and explains how they typically exercise such a strategy. It is suggested that the critical discourse analysis should be deployed specifically in five aspects, namely, the textual structure, semantics, syntactic structure, lexis and rhetoric. And then the linguistic analysis must be related to the social context, so that the particular social relations may be revealed. In the end, a sample analysis is provided in order to help those readers unfamiliar with CDA form a concrete idea of how it
引文
Althusser,L.(1971).IdeologyandIdeologicalStateApparatuses.InLeninandPhilosophyandOtherEssays.London:NewYork.
Dellinger,B.(1995).CriticalDiscourseAnalysis.Online[Available]:http://users.utu.fi/bredelli/cda.html.
FaircloughN.L.(1992).DiscourseandSocialChange.Cambridge:PolityPress.
Fairclough,N.L.(1995).CriticalDiscourseAnalysis:TheCriticalStudyofLanguage.London&NewYork:Longman.
Fowler,R.(1991).LanguageintheNews.London:Routledge.
Fowler,R.,Hodge,B.,Kress,G.,&Trew,T.(1979).LanguageandControl.London:Routledge&KeganPaul.
Gee,J.P.(1990).SocialLinguisticsandLiteracies:IdeologyinDiscourses.TheFalmerPress.
Gee,J.P.(1999).AnIntroductiontoDiscourseAnalysis:TheoryandMethod.London:Routledge.
Gramsci,A.(1971).PrisonNotebooks.NewYork:InternationalPublishers.
Hall,S.(1978).TheSocialProductionofNews.InS.Hall,C.Critcher,T.Jefferson,J.Clarke,andB.Roberts.PolicingtheCrisis.London:Macmillan,pp.53-57.
Hall,S.,Hobson.D.,Lowe,A.,&Willis,P.(Eds.).(1980).Culture,Media,Language.London:Hutchinson.
Hall,S.(1996)TheMeaningofNewTimes.InMorleyD,ChenK(Eds.).StuartHall:CriticalDialoguesinCulturalStudies.London:Routledge.
Halliday,M.A.K(1978).LanguageasSocialSemiotic.London:EdwardArnold.
Halliday,M.A.K.(1985).AnIntroductiontoFunctionalGrammar.London:EdwardArnold.
Hartley,J.(1982).UnderstandingNews.LondonandNewYork:Methuen.
Hodge,R.,&Kress,G.R.(1979).LanguageasIdeology.London:Routledge.
Jensen,B.K.(1995).TheSocialSemioticsofMassCommunication.London:Sage.
Kress,G.(1990).CriticalDiscourseAnalysis.InRobertKaplan(Eds.)AnnualReviewofAppliedLinguistics,Ⅱ.
Kress,G.,&VanLeeuwen,T.(1990).ReadingImages.Victoria:DeakinUniversityPress.
Lee,M.A.,&Solomon,N.(1990).UnreliableSources:AGuidetoDetectingBiasinNewsMedia.CarolPub.Group.
Manoff,R.K.,&Schudson,M.(Eds.).(1987).ReadingtheNews.NewYork:PantheonBooks.
Mingyao,Chen.(2000).ACriticalAnalysisofJournalisticEnglish.Chongqing:ChongqingPub.House.
Parenti,M.(1993).InventingReality.London:EdwardArnold.
Reah,Danuta.(1998).TheLanguageofNewspaper.London:Routledge.
VanDijk,T.A.,&Kintsch,W.(1983).StrategiesofDiscourseComprehension.NewYork:AcademicPress.
VanDijk,T.A.(1984).PrejudiceinDiscourse.Amsterdam:Benjamins.
VanDijk,T.A.(1987).CommunicatingRacism:EthnicPrejudiceinThoughtandTalk.NewburyPark,CA:SagePublications,Inc.
VanDijk,T.A.(1988).NewsasDiscourse.Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.
VanDijk,T.A.(1991).RacismandthePress.London:Routledge.
VanDijk,T.A.(1993).EliteDiscourseandRacism.NewburyPark,CA:SagePublications,Inc.
VanDijk,T.A.(1995).DiscourseSemanticsandIdeology.InDiscourse&Society,Vol.6,No.2,pp.243-290.
VanDijk,T.A.(1998).Ideology:AMultidisciplinaryStudy.London:Sage.
VanDijk,T.A.(2001a).IdeologyandDiscourse:AMultidisciplinaryIntroduction.Online[Available]:http://www.hum.uva.nl/teun/know-news.html.
VanDijk,T.A.(2001b).KnowledgeandNews.Online[Available]:http://www.hum.uva.nl/teun/know-news.html.
VanLeeuwen,T.J.(1993).GenreandFieldinCriticalDiscourseAnalysis:ASynopsis.DiscourseandSociety4(2),193-223.
陈中竺．(1995)．语篇与意识形态：批评性语篇分析．《外国语》，(3)．
端木义万．(1999)．《新篇美英报刊阅读教程》．北京：中国社会科学出版社．
端木义万，王传经，薛洲堂．(2000)．《高校英语报刊教学论丛》．北京：北京大学出版社．
胡钰．(1998)．《科技新闻传播导论》．北京：中国财政经济出版社．
胡壮麟，朱永生，张德禄．(1989)．《系统功能语法概论》．长沙：湖南教育出版社．
鞠玉梅．(1999)．《英语文体学》．青岛：青岛海洋大学出版社．
刘建明，胡钰．(2001)．《科技新闻传播理论》．北京：科学出版社．
刘世生．(1997)．《西方文体学论纲》．济南：山东教育出版社．
孙宝寅．(1997)．《科技传播导论》．北京：清华大学出版社．
王君超．(2001)．《媒介批评：起源·标准·方法》上．北京：北京广播学院出版社．
吴潜龙．(2001)．《英美报刊文章阅读》．上海：上海外语教育出版社．
肖小穗．(2002)．《传媒批评—揭开公开中立的面纱》．哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社．
辛斌．(2000)．批评语言学与英语新闻语篇的批评性分析．《外语教学》，4：44-48．
张德禄．(1998)．《功能文体学》．济南：山东教育出版社．
张延续．(1998)．批评语言学与大众语篇．《解放军外语学院学报》，6：24-27．
周学艺．(1997)．《美英报刊文章选读(上、下)》．北京：北京大学出版社．