中美人权报告介入模式与话语特征对比研究

发布时间：2018-04-11 07:47

本文选题：中美人权报告 + 介入模式　；参考：《华侨大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2017年05期

【摘要】：以评价理论之介入系统为研究框架,借助Ant Conc等分析软件,对比分析2010至2016年中美人权报告介入模式及话语特征的异同。研究显示,中美报告均呈现出"强烈否定、拒绝接纳"的介入模式和"对抗性、权威性"的话语特征。在差异性方面,美方报告的介入模式呈"大幅介入、多方归属、进阶反对"样态,体现出"交互性、辐射性、空间性、焦虑性"四大话语特征。相比之下,中方报告的介入模式呈"直白公告"样态,体现出"单向性、收缩性、平面性、紧张性"话语特征。研究显示,中国涉外人权话语需"强化介入姿态、增补多声资源、优化逻辑演绎",以期有效对抗霸权话语、提升国际话语权。
[Abstract]:Taking the intervention system of evaluation theory as the research framework, and with the help of Ant Conc and other analysis softwares, this paper compares and analyzes the similarities and differences of the intervention patterns and discourse characteristics of human rights reports between China and the United States from 2010 to 2016.The research shows that both Chinese and American reports are characterized by "strong negation, refusal to accept" and "adversarial, authoritative" discourse.In the aspect of difference, the intervention mode reported by the United States is characterized by "large-scale intervention, multi-ownership and advanced opposition", which embodies the characteristics of "interaction, radiance, space and anxiety".In contrast, the intervention mode reported by the Chinese side is in the form of "straightforward announcement", which embodies the discourse characteristics of "unidirectional, contractile, planarity and tension".The study shows that human rights discourse concerning foreign affairs in China needs to "strengthen intervention posture, supplement multi-tone resources and optimize logical deduction", in order to effectively counter hegemonic discourse and enhance international discourse power.
【作者单位】：华侨大学外国语学院;德国慕尼黑大学社会学院;
【基金】：泉州市社会科学规划项目(2017D18) 福建省中青年教师教育科研项目(JAS150096) 2017年华侨大学“语用修辞研究”创新团队计划
【分类号】：H05

【相似文献】