Political Rhetoric: History, Theory and Practice

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.369

Abstract

Abstract:

This essay intends to explore the evolution of Political Rhetoric Analysis (PRA) as a theoretical framework applied in international relations studies. First, the evolution of the definition of political rhetoric, as well as the relevant extant research was reviewed. Second, the theoretical foundation of political rhetoric was investigated under three major paradigms which are frequently adopted to explain interactions of international relations in reality, namely, positivism, constructivism and post-realism. Next, the Political Rhetoric Analysis, a theoretical framework considered to be one of the most widely-accepted and practical analytic tools for political texts was introduced. It is believed that the wide adoption of such a method of analysis will promote the efficacy of policy-analysis from the perspective of discursive analyses. This essay argues that, as a cross-disciplinary research field, the PRA-related studies will not only enrich the theoretical foundation for discursive research in international politics, but may also promote the in-depth theoretical integration of linguistics and other disciplines in the social sciences.

Keywords: Political Rhetoric Analysis (PRA); Political Linguistics; international politics; international relations

摘要：

本文首先以语言学和国际关系话语研究的融合视角,从历时性角度回顾了政治修辞作为学理概念的演化历程和中西方有关政治修辞的既往研究,以实证主义、建构主义和后现代主义3个范式对政治修辞在现实国际关系话语互动实践中的理论基础展开溯源。继而,以目前学界认可度最高的政治修辞分析框架“修辞性政治分析”模式为例,探讨了政治修辞在国际关系政策建构领域的应用,尝试为话语视角下的政策研究提供方法论创新意义上的启示。作为一个跨学科议程,政治修辞研究不仅有效地提升了国际政治中话语研究的理论化水平,也进一步推动了语言学议程的拓展,促进了语言学与社会科学其他学科的深度融合。

关键词: 政治修辞, 政治语言学, 国际政治, 国际关系

CLC Number:

H0-05

Yue Shengsong, Jiang Yu. Political Rhetoric: History, Theory and Practice[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2021, 43(6): 119-135.

岳圣淞, 姜钰. 政治修辞：历史、理论与实践[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2021, 43(6): 119-135.

Figures/Tables 2

References 51

[1]	Adler E. Constructivism and international relations:Sources, contributions, and debates[C]// Carlsnaes W & Simmons B A. Handbook of International Relations. London:SAGE Publications, 2002:96.
[2]	Bodwell M B. Jonathan Potter,representing reality:Discourse,rhetoric,and social construction[J]. The American Journal of Semiotics, 2001, 17(1):273-275. DOI URL
[3]	Checkel J T. Why comply? Social learning and European identity change[J]. International Organization, 2001, 55(3):553-588. DOI URL
[4]	Crines A S, Heppell T, & Dorey P. The Political Rhetoric and Oratory of Margaret Thatcher[M]. New York: Syracuse University, 2016.
[5]	Deacon D, & Wring D. Reporting the 2010 general election:Old media,new media -Old politics,new politics[C]// Wring D,Mortimore R & Atkinson S. Political Communication in Britain:The Leader Debates,the Campaign and the Media in the 2010 General Election. London:Palgrave Macmillan, 2011:281-303.
[6]	Dryzek J S. Rhetoric in democracy:A systemic appreciation[J]. Political Theory, 2010, 38(3):319-339. DOI URL
[7]	Fearon J D. Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes[J]. American Political Science Review, 1994, 88(3):577-592. DOI URL
[8]	Finlayson A. From beliefs to arguments:Interpretive methodology and rhetorical political analysis[J]. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2007, 9(4):545-563. DOI URL
[9]	Finnemore M, & Sikkink K. International norm dynamics and political change[J]. International Organization, 1998, 52(4):887-917. DOI URL
[10]	Gutmann A, & Thompson D. Why Deliberative Democracy?[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004.
[11]	Hampton K N. Comparing bonding and bridging ties for democratic engagement:Everyday use of communication technologies within social networks for civic and civil behaviors[J]. Information,Communication & Society, 2011, 14(4):510-528.
[12]	Hay C. Political discourse analysis:The dangers of methodological absolutism[J]. Political Studies Review, 2013, 11(3):321-327. DOI URL
[13]	Houck D W. Rhetoric as Currency:Hoover,Roosevelt,and the Great Depression[M]. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2001.
[14]	Izadi D. Book review:Isabela Fairclough and Norman Fairclough,Political Discourse Analysis:A Method for Advanced Students[J]. Discourse & Society, 2013, 24(2):249-252.
[15]	Kane J, & Patapan H. The artless art:Leadership and the limits of democratic rhetoric[J]. Australian Journal of Political Science, 2010, 45(3):371-389. DOI URL
[16]	Kapust D J. Republicanism,Rhetoric and Roman Political Thought:Sallust,Livy,and Tacitus[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
[17]	Keohane R O. After Hegemony,Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
[18]	Krebs R R. Narrative and the Making of US National Security[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
[19]	Lichbach M I. Is Rational Choice Theory All of Social Science?[M]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.
[20]	Manjikian M. Positivism,post-positivism,and intelligence analysis[J]. Inter-national Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 2013, 26(3):563-582.
[21]	Minson J. Kant,Rheotirc and Civility[M]. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1993:16-40.
[22]	O’Neill S. Justice in ethnically diverse societies:A critique of political alienation[J]. Ethnicities, 2003, 3(3):369-392. DOI URL
[23]	Orwenjo D O. Political grandstanding and the use of proverbs in African political discourse[J]. Discourse & Society, 2009, 20(1):123-146.
[24]	Popper K R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1959.
[25]	Schelling T C. The Strategy of Conflict[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960.
[26]	Schwarz N. Attitude construction:Evaluation in context[J]. Social Cognition, 2007, 25(5):638-656. DOI URL
[27]	Shapiro M J. Language and Political Understanding:The Politics of Discursive Practice[M]. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.
[28]	Turnbull N. Political rhetoric and its relationship to context:A new theory of the rhetorical situation,the rhetorical and the political[J]. Critical Discourse Studies, 2017, 14(2):115-131. DOI URL
[29]	Wendt A. Anarchy is what states make of it:The social construction of power politics[J]. International Organization, 1992, 46(2):391-425. DOI URL
[30]	Wiesner C, Haapala T, & Palonen K. Debates,Rhetoric and Political Action:Practices of Textual Interpretation and Analysis[M]. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
[31]	Windt T O Jr. Presidents and Protesters:Political Rhetoric in the 1960s[M]. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 1990.
[32]	陈建平, 王加林. 互文性与身份建构话语策略[J]. 中国外语, 2014, 11(2):32-38.
[33]	窦卫霖, 陈丹红. 对中美国家领导人演讲中的互文性现象的批评性话语分析[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2009(11):12-15.
[34]	范武邱, 邹付容. 批评隐喻分析视阈下外交话语与国家身份构建--以中国国家领导人在2007-2018年夏季达沃斯论坛开幕式上的致辞为例[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2021, 43(3):60-72.
[35]	胡全威. 修辞与民主:亚里士多德论政治修辞[J]. 政治思想史, 2013, 4(2):17-44.
[36]	霍布斯. 论公民[M].应星,冯克利,译. 贵阳: 贵州人民出版社, 2003.
[37]	荆学民, 刘胜君. 政治传播研究中的几个核心命题辨正[J]. 现代传播, 2013(7):14-18.
[38]	荆学民, 苏颖. 不同话语的身段与博弈[J]. 人民论坛, 2013(5):59-60.
[39]	昆廷·斯金纳. 道德模糊与文艺复兴雄辩艺术[J].郁迪,译. 政治思想史, 2015, 6(4):100-125.
[40]	刘文科. 政治权力运作中的政治修辞--必要性、普遍性和功能分析[J]. 学习与探索, 2008(4):62-65.
[41]	聂文娟. 现代语言建构主义及“实践性”的缺失[J]. 国际政治研究, 2010, 31(4):103-114.
[42]	苏宝俊, 高海萍. 政治修辞研究述评[J]. 济南大学学报(社会科学版), 2016, 26(1):36-43.
[43]	孙吉胜. 跨学科视域下的国际政治语言学:方向与议程[J]. 外交评论, 2013, 30(1):12-29.
[44]	孙玉华, 彭文钊, 刘宏. 语言的政治vs.政治的语言--政治语言学的理论与方法[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2015(1):1-7.
[45]	王亮. 政治修辞视角下的国家形象传播[J]. 青年记者, 2014(11):84-86.
[46]	韦伯. 经济与社会(上)[M].林荣远,译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1997.
[47]	绪可望, 杨忠. 客观主义、经验现实主义及辩证唯物主义认识论并语言观比较研究[J]. 外语学刊, 2012(1):11-14.
[48]	亚里士多德. 亚里士多德全集(第九卷)[M]. 颜一,译. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 1993.
[49]	张清敏. 隐喻、问题表征与毛泽东的对外政策[J]. 国际政治研究, 2011, 32(2):81-100.
[50]	张清敏, 潘丽君. 类比、认知与毛泽东的对外政策[J]. 世界经济与政治, 2010(11):54-72.
[51]	周作宇. 协同创新:科学概念或政治修辞[J]. 国家教育行政学院学报, 2013(5):3-9.

差异分类	中国政治修辞	西方政治修辞
认知基础	中国古典修辞学、西方现代修辞学	西方修辞学
应用范围	中国当代政治体制	西方政治体制
认知导向	过程导向	结果导向

差异分类	中国政治修辞	西方政治修辞
认知基础	中国古典修辞学、西方现代修辞学	西方修辞学
应用范围	中国当代政治体制	西方政治体制
认知导向	过程导向	结果导向