Contrastive Analysis of Discursive Representations of One Belt One Road Initiative by Foreign Media—A Corpus-based Semantic Prosody Study
-
摘要:
2013年习近平主席提出“一带一路”倡议构想至今已有三年，全球媒体持续关注。文章基于LexisNexis新闻数据库，以2013年9月至2016年6月《纽约时报》、《印度时报》和《海峡时报》的报道为研究样本，在语义韵和评价理论框架内考察不同意识形态的国家媒体对“一带一路”话语建构的特征、差异以及原因。研究发现，美印新三国媒体的“一带一路”术语的英文表达并不一致，其修饰语和指称详略度不同，映射其关注度的高低；《印度时报》显性表达政府对“一带一路”倡议的冷淡态度，《纽约时报》通过对其他国家隐性评价表达美国的反对立场，《海峡时报》则通过积极反应与积极价值词汇构建了对“一带一路”倡议的大力支持。
Abstract:After President Xi Jinping put forward One Belt One Road Initiative in 2013, there is much media coverage on this issue. This paper, based on the LexisNexis data of The New York Times, The Times of India and The Strait Times during September 2013 to June 2016, within the theoretical framework of semantic prosody and appraisal theory, explores the discursive construction of Belt and Road in the different ideological contexts. Findings demonstrate that the three newspapers represent the same social reality out of different stances and interests. They apply different terms to refer to Yidai Yilu. The Times of India explicitly demonstrates Indian government’s cold attitude, while The New York Times implicitly reveals its negative attitude. Through lexis of positive reaction and valuation, The Straits Times portrays overwhelming support for One Belt One Road Initiative.
-
Key words:
- One Belt One Road /
- corpus-based /
- foreign media /
- Appraisal Theory /
- semantic prosody /
- contrastive analysis
-
[1] 杨思灵. “一带一路”倡议下中国与沿线国家关系治理及挑战 [J]. 南亚研究, 2015, (2): 15-34. [2] 袁赛男. 构建“一带一路”倡议视域下的新对外话语体系 [J]. 对外传播, 2015, (6): 13-15. [3] 陈杰,徐沛雨. 阿拉伯媒体视域中的“一带一路”——兼谈中国对阿媒体公共外交 [J]. 回族研究, 2015, (3): 119-125. [4] 薛庆国. “一带一路” 倡议在阿拉伯世界的传播:舆情、实践与建议 [J]. 西亚非洲, 2015, (6): 36-52. [5] 龚婷. “一带一路”:国际舆论反应初探及应对建议 [J]. 对外传播, 2015.(3): 24-26. [6] 白贵,欧斯曼·艾诺. 土耳其媒体和社会对“一带一路”的认识 [J]. 河北大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2016, (2): 102-106. [7] 郑华,李婧. 美国媒体建构下的中国“一带一路”倡议构想——基于《纽约时报》和《华盛顿邮报》相关报道的分析 [J]. 上海对外经贸大学学报, 2016, (1): 87-96. [8] 王辉,贾文娟.国外媒体看“一带一路” [M]. 北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2016. [9] 李晓,李俊久. “一带一路”与中国地缘政治经济战略的重构 [J]. 世界经济与政治, 2015, (10): 30-59. [10] 王卫星. 全球视野下的“一带一路”:风险与挑战 [J]. 人民论坛, 2015, (9): 6-18. [11] Hardt-Mautner, G. Only connect. Critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics [Z/OL]. [2016-5-15]. http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/papers/techpaper/vol6.pdf. [12] Baker, P. A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press [J]. Discourse and Society, 2008, 19(3): 273-306. [13] Martin, J.R. & White, P. R. R. Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005. [14] Firth, J.Papers in Linguistics, 1934-1951 [M]. London: Oxford University Press, 1957. [15] Sinclair, J.Looking Up: An Account of the COBUILD Project in Lexical Computing and the Development of the Collins COBUILD English Language Dictionary [M]. London/Glasgow: Collins, 1987. [16] Sinclair, J.Corpus, Concordance, Collocation [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. [17] Sinclair, J. The search for units of meaning [J]. Textu,, 1996, 9(1): 75-106. [18] Stubbs, M.Text and Corpus Analysis: Computer-assisted Studies of Language and Culture [M]. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996. [19] Bednarek, M. Semantic preference and semantic prosody re-examined [J]. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2008, 4(2): 119-139. [20] 唐丽萍.美国大报之中国形象的语料库语言学方法辅助下的批评话语分析 [M]. 北京:高等教育出版社, 2016. [21] Scott M. Wordsmith Tools, version 5 [CP]. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software Ltd, 2008. [22] Swan, M.Practical English Usage [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. [23] Wei, N. X. & Li, X. H. Exploring semantic preference and semantic prosody across English and Chinese: their roles for cross-linguistic equivalence [J]. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2014, 10(1): 103-138. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 518
- HTML全文浏览量: 117
- PDF下载量: 49
- 被引次数: 0
下载:
