A Comparative Study of Proximization Strategies in Trade Friction Reporting in Sino-American Mainstream Media 中美主流媒体贸易摩擦报道中的趋近化策略对比研究文献综述

 2023-04-20 14:50:27

文献综述

1.IntroductionLanguage has a great role to play, not only as a medium of communication, but also as a tool for politicians to gain popular support and promote their values. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) has helped people to analyse the relationship between language and social influence, but it has many shortcomings. Cap has formally proposed Proximization theory, which has remedied the shortcomings of CDA. It is cognitively oriented and has gained the attention of many scholars.1.1 Background of the research Speakers use a particular type of language, political discourse, to make their speeches more convincing in order to get the audience to support them. Most listeners learn about political events through television, newspapers, radio, etc. They are often deceived by politicians because they do not know the truth. Politicians often use many modifiers and the linguistic strategy of proximization in order to achieve their aims. Many politicians are not only concerned with the volume of their speeches being uplifting, but also with making statements that will be believed by the vast majority of people. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) has received much attention as an important applied linguistic theory that incorporates classical theories from many disciplines, such as ethnography, psychology and linguistics. CDA covers a wide range of topics, and it includes not only applied linguistic theory but also critical linguistics. It was pioneered by scholars at the University of East Anglia and commenced with the publication of Language as Ideology (Kress and Hodge 1979) and Language and Control (Fowler et al. 1979).However, there are many shortcomings and omissions in CDA, and according to Chilton, the neglect of cognition is referred to as the missing link in CDA. Xin Bin(1996) argues that critical discourse analysis requires researchers to consider both social and cognitive aspects, and that both aspects need to be seen as directions for the development of critical discourse analysis. Zhang Hui(2018) argue that the deficiency of CDA lies in the fact that the role of cognition in discourse has not been taken seriously. In this context, this article chooses proximization theory to study CDA and further refine the deficiencies of CDA.1.2 Purposes of the researchThis paper will use theories of proximization to analyse reports related to the trade friction between the US and China, to analyse the ideologies represented by each story, and to further explain how politicians use different methods to confuse their readers. The purpose of this paper is threefold: firstly, to analyse the proximization strategies used in each news report and to identify the different linguistic strategies used in different reports; secondly, to compare the similarities and differences between the proximization strategies used by the Chinese and American media and to discuss the different views expressed in the different reports. Thirdly, analyse the role of proximization theory in journalism and demonstrate how helpful it is to speakers.1.3 Organization of the research This study is divided into seven chapters, with the first chapter beginning with a description of the background and purpose of this study, as well as the importance and structure of the study. Chapter 2 presents a detailed literature review. Chapter 3 consists of four sections, the first explaining the problem to be studied, the second is the corpora of the study, the third is the collection of data and the fourth is the analysis of the data. Chapters four, five and six compare three different proximization strategies used for reports related to US-China trade friction. The similarities and differences of the different strategies are analysed. Chapter 7 concludes the thesis by summarising the main findings and limitations of the paper and making suggestions for future research.2.Literature ReviewThis chapter will introduce the definitions of proximization theory and the types ofproximization strategies, followed by a summary of previous national and international research, which will facilitate the readers understanding of the theory and a more comprehensive understanding of this study.2.1 Definitions of proximizationProximization theory, a new concept in linguistics, has gained the attention of many scholars. It not only makes it easier and faster to analyse political discourse, but also provides a new one for our language studies. It refers to the discursive strategy of making things that happen in different time periods acceptable to the general public in a negative, imperceptible way. (Cap 2014 : 17). The speaker often employs a number of tactics to emphasise that something is having a negative impact on the general public and to make their actions acceptable to the general public. The speakers main aim is to counteract the increasingly far-reaching effects of negative, foreign, unfamiliar and hostile entities on him or her (Cap, 2017).Chilton (2004) introduced the idea of proximize /proximizing. Building on Chiltons ideas, Cap (2006) proposed the concept of proximisation, in which people present temporal proximization, spatial proximization and axiological proximization according to their own position, with the aim of informing the audience about something else. Cap (2006) built on CHiltons idea of proximisation on a detailed analysis of the speakers discourse. After two years of research, Cap (2008) combined Chiltons spatial proximisation with temporal elements to develop the STA model, which he used to study the statements made by leaders during the US-Iraq war. Two years later, Cap (2010) once again proposed a new theory that speakers would use an increasing number of value proximization strategies to make their words more convincing to listeners. Whats more， axiological proximization strategies could compensate for the deficiencies caused by the lack of temporal and spatial proximization strategies. In 2018, Cap improved on Chiltons theory once again by proposing a theory of proximization, including temporal proximization, spatial proximization and axiological proximization.2.2 Categories of proximization strategiesThe spatial-temporal-axiological proximization model put forward by Cap involves a series of strategic deployment of lexical-grammatical choices, which origins from the cognitive categories of space, time and values. The core of STA model is the deictic center, which can be divided into spatial axis (upper axis), temporal axis (left and right axis) and axiological axis (front axis). In discourse space, when indicator centers are conceptualized, some indicators can be placed on different axes to highlight different ideologies, such as here the speaker actively eliminates the negative influence or hostile situation of the foreign entity, in order to promote the legalization of policy or behavior (legitimization) (Cap,2014). As a discourse strategy, the proximization mainly focuses on the symbolic recognition of the entity relationship in the discourse space, that is, how the peripheral members of the discourse space project the symbols to the indicator center member（members of the deictic center) (Chilton,2005).2.4 Overview of previous studiesProximization theory is one of relatively new discourse analysis theories in linguistics. Recently, linguists gradually realized that proximization has played an important role in CDA, pragmatic and cognitive linguistics. Many prominent linguists have contributed themselves to the development of the proximization theory. One of the famous leading scholar is Cap from the University of Lodz, Poland. Until to the present, he still sticks to the researches of proximization theory. For many years, plenty of academic essays and press publications have been published by him, involving mainly previous literature reviews and ongoing development of the proximization theory. The famous academic achievement is Proximization: The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing published in 2013.ReferencesCap, P. (2006). Legitimization in Political Discourse: A Cross-disciplinaiy Perspective on the Modern US friction Rhetoric. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.Cap, P. (2008). Towards the proximization model of the analysis of legitimization in political discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(1), 17-41.Cap, P. (2010). Axiological aspects of proximization. Journal of Pragmatics, 10(42), 392-407．Cap, P. (2013). Proximization: The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Cap, P. (2014). Applying cognitive pragmatics to Critical Discourse Studies: A Proximization analysis of three public space discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, (70): 16-30.Cap, P. (2017). Studying ideological worldviews in political discourse space: Critical-cognitive advances in the analysis of conflict and coercion. Journal of Pragmatics, (108): 17-27.Chilton, P. (2004). Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routldge.Fowler, R. (1979). Language and Control. London: Routledgeamp;Kegan Paul.Kress, G. (1979). Language as Ideology. London: Routledge.辛斌（1996），语言,权力和意识形态：批评语言学，《现代外语》。

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》。

辛斌（2012），批评话语分析中的认知话语分析，《外语教学与研究》，（4）：1-5。

张辉（2018），《恐惧的语言：公共话语中威胁的传达》评价，《天津外国语大学学报》，（2）：150-156。

张辉、颜冰(2019)，政治冲突话语的批评认知语言学 研究一基于叙利亚战争话语的个案研究，《外语与外语教学》，（4）：14-26。

张天伟（2016），政治领导人演讲的话语体系构建研宄一基于近体化理论的案例分析，《中国外语》,（5）：28-35。

资料编号：[577874]

剩余内容已隐藏，您需要先支付 10元 才能查看该篇文章全部内容！立即支付

以上是文献综述，课题毕业论文、任务书、外文翻译、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。

您可能感兴趣的文章