北京第二外国语学院学报 ›› 2018, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (6): 22-39.DOI: 10.12002/j.bisu.184

• 语言学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

中美人权报告评价性话语特征对比研究(2010—2016)

叶惠珍,金琼兰   

  1. 华侨大学外国语学院,362021
  • 收稿日期:2017-06-05 出版日期:2018-12-15 发布日期:2019-04-02
  • 作者简介:叶惠珍,华侨大学外国语学院,362021,研究方向:话语分析、国际政治。电子邮箱:yhzhqu@163.com|金琼兰,华侨大学外国语学院,362021,研究方向:话语分析。电子邮箱:81311980@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    泉州市社科规划项目(2017D18);福建省中青年教师教育科研项目(JZ1600002)

A Comparative Study of the Appraisal Discourse Features of Chinese and American Human Rights Reports(2010-2016)

Huizhen YE,Qionglan JIN   

  1. College of Foreign Languages, Huaqiao University, Quanzhou 362021, China
  • Received:2017-06-05 Online:2018-12-15 Published:2019-04-02

摘要:

本文以评价系统理论为研究框架,对比了2010—2016年中美人权互评报告中评价资源使用情况的差异。研究显示,美方报告比中方报告使用了更多的评价资源,尤其擅长使用“否认”“归属”资源,并串联使用“妥当”与“否认”词汇,借“强化”评价资源虚假渲染中国人权状况的严重性,凸显霸权话语特征,但美方报告存在“归属”引证模糊的策略性错误。相比之下,中方使用的评价资源总频数低于美方,仅在“公告”和“量化”词汇的使用频数上高于美方。中方使用“归属”资源时引证更为翔实,但较少单独或串联使用“否认”与“妥当”评价资源,似与“低冲突性”文化特征等因素有关。今后我国的对外人权话语建构需借鉴他国较优话语策略,加大使用各类评价资源,积极解构霸权话语,提升我国的国际话语权。

关键词: 中美人权报告, 评价系统理论, 话语霸权, 国际话语权

Abstract:

Based on the Appraisal Theory framework of Martin andWhite, this study compares the application of appraisal resources in the human rights reports released by the State Council of China and the U.S. State Department from 2010 to 2016. It is revealed that the State Department of the U.S. has used significantly more appraisal resources, being especially adept at the application of “disclaim” and “attribution” words. A strategic combination of “propriety” and “disclaim” resources is also identified in the American reports, together with a heavy reliance on “intensification” resources. A false picture of serious human rights conditions in China is therefore painted, which indicates an apparent hegemonic discourse feature. A conspicuous lack of consideration in failing to cite the majority of the “attribution” sources is also identified in the study. In comparison, The State Council of China is found to have used evidently fewer appraisal resources, except for “proclaim” and “quantification” words and expressions. The Chinese reports have been found to be more concrete and substantial in the citation of “attribution” sources, but less skillful with the separate or combined usage of “disclaim” and “propriety” resources, a phenomenon seemingly related to the general “conflict-avoiding” Chinese culture as well as a lack of confidence in international debates. In light of the above research results, the Chinese government is advised to examine and borrow certain refined appraisal strategies used by its foreign counterparts when drafting the human rights reports. An increased tactical utilization of linguistic devices in foreign-oriented discourse is deemed advisable and essential for both the deconstruction of international discourse hegemony and the elevation of China’s international speaking rights.

Key words: China and U.S. human rights reports, Appraisal Theory, discourse hegemony, international speaking rights

中图分类号: