西方修辞论辨理论与应用研究
发布时间：2021-01-15 06:53
论辩是一项极为普遍的实践活动,人们在日常生活中随时随处都在使用。但是相对于其它学科领域来说,论辩理论与应用研究却是个较新的领域。论辩研究源于20世纪50年代,直至20世纪末它才基本成型,成为一个足以定义的相对独立的研究领域。它实际上是在旧的基础上发展起来的一片新领域。自亚里士多德时期开始,对于论辩的研究采用的途径有两个:一个是形式逻辑,另一个是修辞学。本研究致力于以古典修辞学为重要背景对西方修辞论辩理论与应用进行研究。迄今为止,对于西方论辩理论的研究,学界还未有一个统一接受的理论。这就意味着在此领域内还有很大空间和许多内容尚待拓展和挖掘。在西方,论辩研究也逐渐从逻辑学和修辞学的边缘发展成为一个跨领域的独立学科,而这门学科还不能用一个主流理论来解释,它的特征是多种方法并存,但这些方法在使用的概念、研究的范围及理论发展上存在相当大的差异。在国内,当今对西方论辩理论的研究几乎是一片空白,论辩理论的研究亟待引起学界关注,因为它对培养人类的批判性思维及价值判断起到极关重要的作用。本论文研究主要采用定性、跨学科和综合性的研究方法,以语言为主附加文字图表的描述性分析为研究手段,同时将解释说明和个案分...
【文章来源】：上海外国语大学上海市 211工程院校 教育部直属院校
【文章页数】：208 页
【学位级别】：博士
【文章目录】：
Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Trigger of the Present Study
1.1.1 Importance of Argumentation
1.1.2 Absence of Universally Accepted Theory
1.1.3 Insufficiency of Studies in China
1.1.4 Need of Argumentation Teaching
1.2 Purpose of the Present Study.
1.3 Methodology and Scope of the Present Study
1.4 Originality of the Present Study
1.5 Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2.1 Historical Background of Modern Argumentation Theory
2.2 Studies in Argumentation Theory Abroad
2.2.1 Rhetorical Approach
2.2.1.1 On The New Rhetoric
○n Audience Theory
○n Typology.
○n Fallacies
○n Legal Argumentation
○n More Topics.
2.2.1.2 On The Uses of Argument
○n Application of the Model.
○n Field-dependency
○n Informal Logic.
○n More Topics.
2.2.2 Pragma-dialectical Approach
2.2.3 Informal Logic Approach
2.2.4 Philosophical Approach
2.2.5 Linguistic Approach
2.3 Studies in Argumentation Theory in China
2.4 Summary
2.4.1 Confusion of Definitions and Argumentation Schemes
2.4.2 Isolation from Context and Cultural Situation
2.4.3 Less Attention to the Refinement of Toulmin’s Schema
Chapter Three: Argumentation: Definition & Related Disciplines
3.1 Definition of Argumentation
3.1.1 Different Views of Definitions
3.1.2 Analysis of Different Definitions
3.1.3 The Present Study’s Definition
3.2 Logos, Ethos and Pathos
3.2.1 Logos
3.2.2 Ethos
3.2.3 Pathos
3.3 Basic Concepts of Argumentation
3.3.1 Agents Involved in Argumentation
3.3.2 Information Involved in Argumentation
3.3.3 Two Forms of Argumentation.
3.4 Related Disciplines
3.4.1 Logic
3.4.2 Rhetoric
3.4.2.1 Five Components
3.4.2.2 Persuasion
3.4.3 Informal Logic
3.4.3.1 Definition and Research Issues of Informal Logic.
3.4.3.2 Characteristics of Informal Logic
3.4.3.3 Informal logic and Critical Thinking.
3.5 Summary
Chapter Four: Argumentation Rhetorical Proof—Enthymeme
4.1 The Importance of Enthymeme
4.2 The Definition of Enthymeme
4.2.1 Conceptions of the Enthymeme
4.2.1.1 Baldwin’s Conception
4.2.1.2 Lane Cooper’s Conception.
4.2.1.3 MaBurney’s & Madden’s Conception
4.2.1.4 Bitzer’s Conception.
4.2.1.5 Bumyeat’s & Copi and Cohen’s Conception
4.2.1.6 Other Definitions
4.2.2 The Present Study’s Definition
4.2.2.1 The Definition of Enthymeme
4.2.2.2 Normal Syllogism
4.2.2.3 Minimal Requirement of Enthymemes
4.2.2.4 Illustration of Enthymeme
4.3 The Characteristics of Enthymeme
4.3.1 The Bases of Enthymemes
4.3.2 As Deductive Rhetorical Argument
4.3.3 Truncation
4.3.4 Probability.
4.3.5 Logical, Ethical and Emotional Appeals
4.3.6 Audience Involvement
4.4 Case Study -- David Duke’s Enthymeme.
4.4.1 Background of David Duke
4.4.2 The Content of Duke’s Speech
4.4.3 The Three-Step Enthymeme Construction
4.4.4 The Illustration of Duke’s Enthymeme
4.4.5 The Success of Duke’s Enthymeme
4.5 Summary
Chapter Five: Argumentation Scheme.
5.1 The Traditional Theories of Argumentation Schemes.
5.1.1 The Origin of Topics
5.1.2 Topics in Ancient Greece.
5.1.3 Topics in the Renaissance and 17th Century
5.2 The Modern Theories of Argumentation Schemes
5.2.1 Perelman on the Topics
5.2.2 Van Eemeren and Kruiger’s Topics
5.3 The Present Study’s Topics.
5.3.1 Topics of Reasoning: Logos Argumentation
5.3.2 Topics of Speaker: Ethos argumentation
5.3.3 Topics of Audience: Pathos Argumentation
5.4 Case Study 1-- Rhetorical Argumentation in Obama’s Shanghai Speech
5.4.1 Brief Introduction of Obama’s Shanghai Speech.
5.4.2 Construction of Rhetorical Argumentation
5.4.2.1 Logos Argumentation
Argumentation Based on Induction
Argumentation Based on Comparison
Argumentation Based on Causal Reasoning
Argumentation Based on Examples
5.4.2.2 Ethos Argumentation
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of Oneself
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation a Third Person.
5.4.2.3 Pathos Argumentation
Argumentation by Appealing to Popularity and Mercy
5.5 Case study 2-- Rhetorical Argumentation in Obama’s Inaugural Address
5.5.1 Brief Introduction of Obama’s Inaugural Address
5.5.2 The Long-Neglected Rhetorical Argumentation
5.5.2.1 Ethos argumentation.
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of Oneself
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of a Third Person
Argumentation by Degrading the Reputation of a Third Person
5.5.2.2 Pathos Argumentation
Argumentation Based on Motives
Argumentation Based on Mercy
5.6 Summary
Chapter Six: Audience Perspective of Argumentation
6.1 Perelman’s Argumentation Theory.
6.1.1 Perelmanian Philosophy
6.1.2 The Framework of the New Rhetoric
6.1.2.1 Perelman’s Universal Audience
6.1.2.2 The Starting Points of Argumentation
6.1.2.3 Argument Techniques
6.1.3 Responses to Perelman and The New Rhetoric
6.2 Analysis of Perelman’s Argumentation Theory.
6.2.1 Analysis of Universal Audience
6.2.1.1 Rhetorical Element of Universal Audience
6.2.1.2 Epistemic Element of Universal Audience
6.2.1.3 Confusion of Universal audience
6.3 Construction of Aim-situation-oriented Audience of Argument
6.3.1 Category of Aim-oriented Audience
6.3.1.1 Aim of Argument
A.A rguing to Inquire
B.A rguing to Negotiate
C.A rguing to Persuade.
D.A rguing to Convince
6.3.2 Category of Situation-oriented Audience
6.3.2.1 The Rhetorical Situation.
A.A udience
B.E xigence
C.C onstraints
6.3.2.2 Contexts of Argument
A.P ersonal
B.111 terpersonal
C.P rofessional
D.P ublic.
6.4 Summary
Chapter Seven: Conclusion
7.1 Major Research Contributions
7.1.1 New Definition of Argumentation
7.1.2 The Three Key Pairs of Relation.
7.1.3 The Function of Argumentation Rhetorical Proof—Enthymeme
7.1.4 A New Category of Argumentation Schemes—Rhetorical Schemes
7.1.5 The New Argumentation Category of Aim-situation-oriented Audience
7.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
Appendix 1: Barack Obama’s Inaugural Address
Appendix 2: Barack Obama’s Shanghai Speech
Bibliography
【参考文献】：
期刊论文
[1]从新修辞学论辩理论看英专学生逻辑思维特点[J]. 柴改英. 浙江工商大学学报. 2009(02)
[2]英汉论辩语篇宏观结构及信息展开模式对比修辞研究[J]. 夏莉. 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版). 2007(01)
[3]英汉论辩语篇信息阐释责任及引用度对比研究[J]. 夏莉. 平原大学学报. 2006(06)
[4]《翻译质量评估:论辩理论模式》评介[J]. 武光军. 外语研究. 2006(04)
[5]英语阅读教学中论辩类篇章的篇章模式分析[J]. 洪明. 浙江师范大学学报. 2005(03)
[6]修辞论辩与非形式逻辑[J]. 樊明明. 解放军外国语学院学报. 2005(03)
[7]论辩理论在俄罗斯的研究现状及评述[J]. 樊明明. 解放军外国语学院学报. 2003(06)
[8]修辞三段论及其修辞运作模式[J]. 邓志勇. 外国语言文学. 2003(01)
[9]论辩话语研究——Frans van Eemeren和Rob Grootendorst的理论简介[J]. 施旭. 外语教学与研究. 1992(03)
博士论文
[1]修辞批评新模式构建研究[D]. 袁影.上海外国语大学 2008
本文编号：2978452
【文章来源】：上海外国语大学上海市 211工程院校 教育部直属院校
【文章页数】：208 页
【学位级别】：博士
【文章目录】：
Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
List of Tables and Figures
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Trigger of the Present Study
1.1.1 Importance of Argumentation
1.1.2 Absence of Universally Accepted Theory
1.1.3 Insufficiency of Studies in China
1.1.4 Need of Argumentation Teaching
1.2 Purpose of the Present Study.
1.3 Methodology and Scope of the Present Study
1.4 Originality of the Present Study
1.5 Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter Two: Literature Review
2.1 Historical Background of Modern Argumentation Theory
2.2 Studies in Argumentation Theory Abroad
2.2.1 Rhetorical Approach
2.2.1.1 On The New Rhetoric
○n Audience Theory
○n Typology.
○n Fallacies
○n Legal Argumentation
○n More Topics.
2.2.1.2 On The Uses of Argument
○n Application of the Model.
○n Field-dependency
○n Informal Logic.
○n More Topics.
2.2.2 Pragma-dialectical Approach
2.2.3 Informal Logic Approach
2.2.4 Philosophical Approach
2.2.5 Linguistic Approach
2.3 Studies in Argumentation Theory in China
2.4 Summary
2.4.1 Confusion of Definitions and Argumentation Schemes
2.4.2 Isolation from Context and Cultural Situation
2.4.3 Less Attention to the Refinement of Toulmin’s Schema
Chapter Three: Argumentation: Definition & Related Disciplines
3.1 Definition of Argumentation
3.1.1 Different Views of Definitions
3.1.2 Analysis of Different Definitions
3.1.3 The Present Study’s Definition
3.2 Logos, Ethos and Pathos
3.2.1 Logos
3.2.2 Ethos
3.2.3 Pathos
3.3 Basic Concepts of Argumentation
3.3.1 Agents Involved in Argumentation
3.3.2 Information Involved in Argumentation
3.3.3 Two Forms of Argumentation.
3.4 Related Disciplines
3.4.1 Logic
3.4.2 Rhetoric
3.4.2.1 Five Components
3.4.2.2 Persuasion
3.4.3 Informal Logic
3.4.3.1 Definition and Research Issues of Informal Logic.
3.4.3.2 Characteristics of Informal Logic
3.4.3.3 Informal logic and Critical Thinking.
3.5 Summary
Chapter Four: Argumentation Rhetorical Proof—Enthymeme
4.1 The Importance of Enthymeme
4.2 The Definition of Enthymeme
4.2.1 Conceptions of the Enthymeme
4.2.1.1 Baldwin’s Conception
4.2.1.2 Lane Cooper’s Conception.
4.2.1.3 MaBurney’s & Madden’s Conception
4.2.1.4 Bitzer’s Conception.
4.2.1.5 Bumyeat’s & Copi and Cohen’s Conception
4.2.1.6 Other Definitions
4.2.2 The Present Study’s Definition
4.2.2.1 The Definition of Enthymeme
4.2.2.2 Normal Syllogism
4.2.2.3 Minimal Requirement of Enthymemes
4.2.2.4 Illustration of Enthymeme
4.3 The Characteristics of Enthymeme
4.3.1 The Bases of Enthymemes
4.3.2 As Deductive Rhetorical Argument
4.3.3 Truncation
4.3.4 Probability.
4.3.5 Logical, Ethical and Emotional Appeals
4.3.6 Audience Involvement
4.4 Case Study -- David Duke’s Enthymeme.
4.4.1 Background of David Duke
4.4.2 The Content of Duke’s Speech
4.4.3 The Three-Step Enthymeme Construction
4.4.4 The Illustration of Duke’s Enthymeme
4.4.5 The Success of Duke’s Enthymeme
4.5 Summary
Chapter Five: Argumentation Scheme.
5.1 The Traditional Theories of Argumentation Schemes.
5.1.1 The Origin of Topics
5.1.2 Topics in Ancient Greece.
5.1.3 Topics in the Renaissance and 17th Century
5.2 The Modern Theories of Argumentation Schemes
5.2.1 Perelman on the Topics
5.2.2 Van Eemeren and Kruiger’s Topics
5.3 The Present Study’s Topics.
5.3.1 Topics of Reasoning: Logos Argumentation
5.3.2 Topics of Speaker: Ethos argumentation
5.3.3 Topics of Audience: Pathos Argumentation
5.4 Case Study 1-- Rhetorical Argumentation in Obama’s Shanghai Speech
5.4.1 Brief Introduction of Obama’s Shanghai Speech.
5.4.2 Construction of Rhetorical Argumentation
5.4.2.1 Logos Argumentation
Argumentation Based on Induction
Argumentation Based on Comparison
Argumentation Based on Causal Reasoning
Argumentation Based on Examples
5.4.2.2 Ethos Argumentation
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of Oneself
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation a Third Person.
5.4.2.3 Pathos Argumentation
Argumentation by Appealing to Popularity and Mercy
5.5 Case study 2-- Rhetorical Argumentation in Obama’s Inaugural Address
5.5.1 Brief Introduction of Obama’s Inaugural Address
5.5.2 The Long-Neglected Rhetorical Argumentation
5.5.2.1 Ethos argumentation.
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of Oneself
Argumentation by Appealing to the Reputation of a Third Person
Argumentation by Degrading the Reputation of a Third Person
5.5.2.2 Pathos Argumentation
Argumentation Based on Motives
Argumentation Based on Mercy
5.6 Summary
Chapter Six: Audience Perspective of Argumentation
6.1 Perelman’s Argumentation Theory.
6.1.1 Perelmanian Philosophy
6.1.2 The Framework of the New Rhetoric
6.1.2.1 Perelman’s Universal Audience
6.1.2.2 The Starting Points of Argumentation
6.1.2.3 Argument Techniques
6.1.3 Responses to Perelman and The New Rhetoric
6.2 Analysis of Perelman’s Argumentation Theory.
6.2.1 Analysis of Universal Audience
6.2.1.1 Rhetorical Element of Universal Audience
6.2.1.2 Epistemic Element of Universal Audience
6.2.1.3 Confusion of Universal audience
6.3 Construction of Aim-situation-oriented Audience of Argument
6.3.1 Category of Aim-oriented Audience
6.3.1.1 Aim of Argument
A.A rguing to Inquire
B.A rguing to Negotiate
C.A rguing to Persuade.
D.A rguing to Convince
6.3.2 Category of Situation-oriented Audience
6.3.2.1 The Rhetorical Situation.
A.A udience
B.E xigence
C.C onstraints
6.3.2.2 Contexts of Argument
A.P ersonal
B.111 terpersonal
C.P rofessional
D.P ublic.
6.4 Summary
Chapter Seven: Conclusion
7.1 Major Research Contributions
7.1.1 New Definition of Argumentation
7.1.2 The Three Key Pairs of Relation.
7.1.3 The Function of Argumentation Rhetorical Proof—Enthymeme
7.1.4 A New Category of Argumentation Schemes—Rhetorical Schemes
7.1.5 The New Argumentation Category of Aim-situation-oriented Audience
7.2 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
Appendix 1: Barack Obama’s Inaugural Address
Appendix 2: Barack Obama’s Shanghai Speech
Bibliography
【参考文献】：
期刊论文
[1]从新修辞学论辩理论看英专学生逻辑思维特点[J]. 柴改英. 浙江工商大学学报. 2009(02)
[2]英汉论辩语篇宏观结构及信息展开模式对比修辞研究[J]. 夏莉. 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版). 2007(01)
[3]英汉论辩语篇信息阐释责任及引用度对比研究[J]. 夏莉. 平原大学学报. 2006(06)
[4]《翻译质量评估:论辩理论模式》评介[J]. 武光军. 外语研究. 2006(04)
[5]英语阅读教学中论辩类篇章的篇章模式分析[J]. 洪明. 浙江师范大学学报. 2005(03)
[6]修辞论辩与非形式逻辑[J]. 樊明明. 解放军外国语学院学报. 2005(03)
[7]论辩理论在俄罗斯的研究现状及评述[J]. 樊明明. 解放军外国语学院学报. 2003(06)
[8]修辞三段论及其修辞运作模式[J]. 邓志勇. 外国语言文学. 2003(01)
[9]论辩话语研究——Frans van Eemeren和Rob Grootendorst的理论简介[J]. 施旭. 外语教学与研究. 1992(03)
博士论文
[1]修辞批评新模式构建研究[D]. 袁影.上海外国语大学 2008
本文编号：2978452
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2978452.html
