中美政府首脑记者招待会语言对比研究
|
摘要
记者招待会是政府部门、社会团体或个人出于各种原因(比如发布新闻、塑造形象、澄清事实等)专为新闻记者举行的会议。它本身有多种类型和层次,其中政府首脑记者招待会规格最高,规模最大,最具新闻价值,是政府首脑通过媒体向公众传播信息、扩大影响的特殊会议,它所传递的信息相对直接、权威和丰富。
本文选取中美政府首脑记者招待会作为研究对象,以会话分析学、批评语篇分析和系统功能语言学等为理论基础,通过定量定性相结合的研究方法,对两任中国总理和两任美国总统就职后主持的首次大型政府记者招待会语料从语言学角度进行了较为系统全面的对比性研究,试图找到研究政治新闻语篇中人际资源的可行模式。
中美政府首脑如何通过记者招待会这个平台与媒体和大众沟通是本研究关注的重点。本研究试图回答以下问题:
1.在问答环节,政府首脑通常采取什么样的策略应对各种问题?中美首脑在策略选择方面有无差异?如果有,是什么?
2.来自不同背景的政府首脑如何通过语言行使自己的职权?各自的意识形态如何影响其价值判断?
3.政府首脑通过什么方式打造个人和政府的整体形象?中美首脑双方在策略方面有何明显异同?
4.政府新闻语篇的人际介入是如何实现的?
5.研究政府首脑记者招待会这种涉及多学科的混合语篇的意义何在?在理论上和实践上有何启示?
通过对以上问题的定性和定量研究,我们发现,中美记者招待会有很多相似点,也有很多差异。
相似点如下:
1.政府记者招待会上的问题大致可分为四类:具体信息、信息确认、澄清事实、发表评论。70%以上的问题都是要求政府首脑提供具体信息。
2.在应答策略方面,中美首脑双方对50%以上的问题都给了正面、直接回答。
3.中美政府记者招待会均涉及两大主题:国内政策和国际关系。国内政策是双方关心的焦点。
4.作为被采访者的中美双方政府首脑在大型记者招待会上都享有一部分特别的话语权。
5.双方都倾向于使用像“very”一类的高值词汇,极少使用“none”一类的低值词汇。诸如此类。
其差异表现在:
1.对于不愿或者不便回答的问题,双方采取的应对策略不同。美方或者直接拒绝或者给出理由,而中方通常不是采取回避策略,就是回答不充分。
2.对于某些特定问题,中方回答时较多使用了替代策略。
3.中国政府大型记者招待会有三大主题,美方一般是两个主题。
4.问答环节中,记者的发问权在中国由政府职员决定,在美国由总统本人点名。
5.国际关系方面,中国政府更注重跟邻国的关系,而美国政府似乎只关注中东问题。
6.美国政府首脑的语言比中方更加个性化,更富有浓厚的个人感情色彩。
7.统计显示,中国总理更多倾向使用确定性情态表达,而美国总统对确定和不确定性情态没有明显偏向……
作者继而对这些发现进行了分析和讨论,指出了该研究结果与以往研究结论的异同,并试着对这些异同作了一定的解释。最后,作者总结了本研究的创新点,并指出了后续研究的方向。
作者认为,作为涉及多学科的混合语篇,政府记者招待会有很大的理论研究价值,值得多种语言理论学派从多角度进行深度探究,以期创建研究该语篇的可行模式。
This dissertation explores the ways top political leaders practice public communication at government press conferences (GPC). The theoretical foundations are made up of three different yet complementary orientations to language and discourse: Conversation Analysis (CA), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). For better insights into GPC, the corpus is analyzed for this project both qualitatively and quantitatively.
The multidimensionality of political media discourse has aroused the interest of many discourse analysts. GPC, however, has rarely been the specific subject of study. Although there have been some studies reported in the field of presidential press conferences in general, there has been very little, even no work on the comparison of government press conferences by political leaders from massively different ideological backgrounds. Taking an integrated approach, this thesis is intended to fill that gap by focusing on GPC involving two Chinese Premiers and two US Presidents. Their press conferences these years provide rich data for the study of their ways to successful and fruitful public communication through media in arriving at their political goals.
The analysis was firstly based on a corpus of 20 political press conferences by top political leaders dating from 1996 to 2008 and later particularly focused on 4 inaugural press conferences chaired by them right after they took office as premier/ president for a better control of the variables involved and as a result of the rotten time limit. The data left serve as reference for this study. In addition, to validate the analysis, a corpus of secondary data consisting of statements, commentaries, news and views expressed in the media by spokespersons, associates, news reporters, political analysts, and academics, from a variety of media sources with such modalities as text, audio, and video, has been considered.
The focus of this study is on the way top political leaders position themselves, journalists and the public through GPC with a comparative approach, we are supposed to answer the following research questions:
1. What strategies are adopted by top political leaders to handle questions put to them at GPC? Do they have different preferences in strategy choice?
2. How do politicians from two different cultures perform their institutional roles via language respectively? And how do they present ideological evaluation of their own at GPC?
3. In what ways does head of government (HG) build better an image of his own at GPC? What similarities and differences are evident in doing so between HGs from such different ideological backgrounds?
4. What are similarities and differences between China premiers and US presidents in expressing their (un)certainty?
5. How is interpersonal engagement realized in political media discourse of this kind?
6. What are the implications for political discourse study?
a. How can the findings of the study inform political figures and journalists?
b. How can the findings of the study inform linguists about political discourse in the media?
The dissertation is chiefly guided by the six research questions. It is found that there are both similarities and differences between China GPC and US GPC.
(i) Similarities between China GPC and US GPC
a. The request at GPC for specific information is the most frequently adopted strategy by journalists from both cultures, accounting for about 70% of all questions.
b. HGs from both nations answered over 50% questions hit to them in a direct way and no criticism strategies were taken in both data.
c. Both have two major themes at GPC, home issues and international relations.
d. Home policies invite most interest of journalists in both China and US GPC
e. Top political figures from two different countries enjoy partial discursive power
f. GPC of both countries share similar ritual structure, consisting of 3 sessions, a short statement by HG, question-answer, and acknowledgement.
g. Both parties adopted much high value lexis like very and much less low value lexis like none.
(ii) Differences between China GPC and US GPC
a. Both parties preferred different strategies when they were unwilling or not in a position to answer some questions from journalists. 'direct refusals' and 'reason' were pretty more frequently taken strategies in the US data while avoidance and insufficient answers were the major strategies in the Chinese corpus.
b. Strategies of alternative were used more often by the China HGs than the other party.
c. There were 3 major themes in China GPC while only 2 in US data.
d. During the political interview, it is the government employee who assigns the floor to certain journalists in China while it is the president himself who does it in US.
e. China attaches importance to the relations with its neighbors while Middle East alone appears the concern of US when it comes to international relations.
f. US HGs were more personal while their China counterparts were more impersonal in the sense that the former a lot more frequently used parenthetical expressions than the latter.
g. China HGs largely preferred certainty to uncertainty in response to questions and US HGs seemingly cared to enjoy both of them.
The study contributes a theoretically motivated, multi-dimensional and pragmatic explanation of political discourse in the media.
In brief, the dissertation consists of seven chapters. The first chapter introduces the research background and motives, the theoretical foundations and the significance of the study. Chapter two is focused on the histories and functions of government press conferences. Chapter three reviews theoretical foundations of the present study with political discourse in the media. The following three chapters correspondingly analyze the selected corpus from the three theoretical perspectives. Chiefly based on the findings and conclusions from the previous three chapters, chapter seven makes a summary of the findings for insights, conclusions and suggestions, paving the way for the would-be creation of a model for political media discourse.
本文选取中美政府首脑记者招待会作为研究对象,以会话分析学、批评语篇分析和系统功能语言学等为理论基础,通过定量定性相结合的研究方法,对两任中国总理和两任美国总统就职后主持的首次大型政府记者招待会语料从语言学角度进行了较为系统全面的对比性研究,试图找到研究政治新闻语篇中人际资源的可行模式。
中美政府首脑如何通过记者招待会这个平台与媒体和大众沟通是本研究关注的重点。本研究试图回答以下问题:
1.在问答环节,政府首脑通常采取什么样的策略应对各种问题?中美首脑在策略选择方面有无差异?如果有,是什么?
2.来自不同背景的政府首脑如何通过语言行使自己的职权?各自的意识形态如何影响其价值判断?
3.政府首脑通过什么方式打造个人和政府的整体形象?中美首脑双方在策略方面有何明显异同?
4.政府新闻语篇的人际介入是如何实现的?
5.研究政府首脑记者招待会这种涉及多学科的混合语篇的意义何在?在理论上和实践上有何启示?
通过对以上问题的定性和定量研究,我们发现,中美记者招待会有很多相似点,也有很多差异。
相似点如下:
1.政府记者招待会上的问题大致可分为四类:具体信息、信息确认、澄清事实、发表评论。70%以上的问题都是要求政府首脑提供具体信息。
2.在应答策略方面,中美首脑双方对50%以上的问题都给了正面、直接回答。
3.中美政府记者招待会均涉及两大主题:国内政策和国际关系。国内政策是双方关心的焦点。
4.作为被采访者的中美双方政府首脑在大型记者招待会上都享有一部分特别的话语权。
5.双方都倾向于使用像“very”一类的高值词汇,极少使用“none”一类的低值词汇。诸如此类。
其差异表现在:
1.对于不愿或者不便回答的问题,双方采取的应对策略不同。美方或者直接拒绝或者给出理由,而中方通常不是采取回避策略,就是回答不充分。
2.对于某些特定问题,中方回答时较多使用了替代策略。
3.中国政府大型记者招待会有三大主题,美方一般是两个主题。
4.问答环节中,记者的发问权在中国由政府职员决定,在美国由总统本人点名。
5.国际关系方面,中国政府更注重跟邻国的关系,而美国政府似乎只关注中东问题。
6.美国政府首脑的语言比中方更加个性化,更富有浓厚的个人感情色彩。
7.统计显示,中国总理更多倾向使用确定性情态表达,而美国总统对确定和不确定性情态没有明显偏向……
作者继而对这些发现进行了分析和讨论,指出了该研究结果与以往研究结论的异同,并试着对这些异同作了一定的解释。最后,作者总结了本研究的创新点,并指出了后续研究的方向。
作者认为,作为涉及多学科的混合语篇,政府记者招待会有很大的理论研究价值,值得多种语言理论学派从多角度进行深度探究,以期创建研究该语篇的可行模式。
This dissertation explores the ways top political leaders practice public communication at government press conferences (GPC). The theoretical foundations are made up of three different yet complementary orientations to language and discourse: Conversation Analysis (CA), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). For better insights into GPC, the corpus is analyzed for this project both qualitatively and quantitatively.
The multidimensionality of political media discourse has aroused the interest of many discourse analysts. GPC, however, has rarely been the specific subject of study. Although there have been some studies reported in the field of presidential press conferences in general, there has been very little, even no work on the comparison of government press conferences by political leaders from massively different ideological backgrounds. Taking an integrated approach, this thesis is intended to fill that gap by focusing on GPC involving two Chinese Premiers and two US Presidents. Their press conferences these years provide rich data for the study of their ways to successful and fruitful public communication through media in arriving at their political goals.
The analysis was firstly based on a corpus of 20 political press conferences by top political leaders dating from 1996 to 2008 and later particularly focused on 4 inaugural press conferences chaired by them right after they took office as premier/ president for a better control of the variables involved and as a result of the rotten time limit. The data left serve as reference for this study. In addition, to validate the analysis, a corpus of secondary data consisting of statements, commentaries, news and views expressed in the media by spokespersons, associates, news reporters, political analysts, and academics, from a variety of media sources with such modalities as text, audio, and video, has been considered.
The focus of this study is on the way top political leaders position themselves, journalists and the public through GPC with a comparative approach, we are supposed to answer the following research questions:
1. What strategies are adopted by top political leaders to handle questions put to them at GPC? Do they have different preferences in strategy choice?
2. How do politicians from two different cultures perform their institutional roles via language respectively? And how do they present ideological evaluation of their own at GPC?
3. In what ways does head of government (HG) build better an image of his own at GPC? What similarities and differences are evident in doing so between HGs from such different ideological backgrounds?
4. What are similarities and differences between China premiers and US presidents in expressing their (un)certainty?
5. How is interpersonal engagement realized in political media discourse of this kind?
6. What are the implications for political discourse study?
a. How can the findings of the study inform political figures and journalists?
b. How can the findings of the study inform linguists about political discourse in the media?
The dissertation is chiefly guided by the six research questions. It is found that there are both similarities and differences between China GPC and US GPC.
(i) Similarities between China GPC and US GPC
a. The request at GPC for specific information is the most frequently adopted strategy by journalists from both cultures, accounting for about 70% of all questions.
b. HGs from both nations answered over 50% questions hit to them in a direct way and no criticism strategies were taken in both data.
c. Both have two major themes at GPC, home issues and international relations.
d. Home policies invite most interest of journalists in both China and US GPC
e. Top political figures from two different countries enjoy partial discursive power
f. GPC of both countries share similar ritual structure, consisting of 3 sessions, a short statement by HG, question-answer, and acknowledgement.
g. Both parties adopted much high value lexis like very and much less low value lexis like none.
(ii) Differences between China GPC and US GPC
a. Both parties preferred different strategies when they were unwilling or not in a position to answer some questions from journalists. 'direct refusals' and 'reason' were pretty more frequently taken strategies in the US data while avoidance and insufficient answers were the major strategies in the Chinese corpus.
b. Strategies of alternative were used more often by the China HGs than the other party.
c. There were 3 major themes in China GPC while only 2 in US data.
d. During the political interview, it is the government employee who assigns the floor to certain journalists in China while it is the president himself who does it in US.
e. China attaches importance to the relations with its neighbors while Middle East alone appears the concern of US when it comes to international relations.
f. US HGs were more personal while their China counterparts were more impersonal in the sense that the former a lot more frequently used parenthetical expressions than the latter.
g. China HGs largely preferred certainty to uncertainty in response to questions and US HGs seemingly cared to enjoy both of them.
The study contributes a theoretically motivated, multi-dimensional and pragmatic explanation of political discourse in the media.
In brief, the dissertation consists of seven chapters. The first chapter introduces the research background and motives, the theoretical foundations and the significance of the study. Chapter two is focused on the histories and functions of government press conferences. Chapter three reviews theoretical foundations of the present study with political discourse in the media. The following three chapters correspondingly analyze the selected corpus from the three theoretical perspectives. Chiefly based on the findings and conclusions from the previous three chapters, chapter seven makes a summary of the findings for insights, conclusions and suggestions, paving the way for the would-be creation of a model for political media discourse.
引文
Aijmer, K. 1997. I think - an English modal particle. In T. Swan & O.J. Westvik, Modrrlity in Germanic languages. Historicczl and comparative perspectives. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1-47.
Atkinson, M. 1984. Our masters' voices. The language and body language of politics. LondodNew York: Methuen.
Atkinson, M. 1988. Our Masters' Voices: The Language and Body Language of Politics. London: Routledge.
Barkin, S.M. 1983. 'Eisenhower's Television Planning Board: An Unwritten Chapter in the History of Political Broadcasting', Journal of Broadcasting 27(4): 319-31.
Bayley,Paul. 2004. Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse (ed.). John Benjamins. Beebe, L.M. and Takahashi, T. 1989.'Sociolinguistic Variation in Face-Threatening Speech Acts', in M.R. Eisenstein (ed.), The Dynamic Interlanguage: Empirical Studies in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 199-218.. New York: Plenum.
Beebe, L.M., Takahashi, T. and Uliss-Weltz, R. 1990. 'Pragmatic Transfer in ESL Refusals', in R. Scarcella, E. Anderson and S. Krashen (eds) Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language, pp. 55-73. New York: Newbury House.
Bell, A. and Garrett, P. (eds) .1998.Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bell, D.V.J. 1995. 'Negotiation in the Workplace: The View from a Political Linguist', in A.
Bettinghaus, E.P. and Cody, M.J. 1994. Persuasive Communication. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Bhatia, Aditi. 2006. Critical discourse analysis of political press conferences. Discourse & Society
Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Reppen, R. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Biletzki, A. 1997.Talking Wolves: Thomas Hobbes on the Language of Politics and the Politics of Language. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Blum-Kulka, S. and Olshtain, E. 1984. 'Requests and Apologies: A Cross Cultural Study of Speech Act Realization Patterns', Applied Linguistics 5:196-213.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. and Kasper, G. (eds) .1989. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Brace, Paul, and Barbara Hinckley.1992. Follow the leader: opinion polls and the Modern presidents. New York: Basic Books.
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1983.Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. 1990. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bublitz, W. 1992. Transferred negation and modality. Journal of Pragmatics 18: 551-77.
Bull, P. 1994. 'On Identifying Questions, Replies, and Non-replies in Political Interviews', Journal of Language and Social Psychology 13:115-31.
Bull, P. 1998. 'Equivocation Theory and News Interviews', Journal of Language and Social Psychology 17: 36-51.
Bull, P. and Mayer, K. 1993. 'How Not to Answer Questions in Political Interviews', Political Psychology 14: 651-66.
Burnard, L. (ed.) 1995. Users reference guide for the British National Corpus. Version 1.0. Oxford University Computing Services.
Bush, G2002.http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020221-7.html
Cameron, D. 2003. "Globalizing 'communication'." In New Media Language, J. Aitchison and Chafe, W. 1986. Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols, Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology. Nonvood, N.J.: Ablex. 261-72.
Chan, V.P.K. 2002a. 'US to Restart Talks on Rights', South China Morning Post (26 October): 1. Chan, V.P.K. 2002b. 'China and US Find Common Goal', South China Morning Post (27 October): p. 1.
Chen, X., Ye, L. and Zhang, Y. 1995. 'Refusing in Chinese', in G. Kasper (ed.) Pragmatics of Chinese as a Native and Target Language, pp. 119-63. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
Cheng, M. 2002. 'The Standoff - What is Unsaid? A Pragmatic Analysis of the Conditional Marker "If", Discourse & Society 13(3): 309-17.
Chilton, P. (ed.) 1985. Language and the Nuclear Arms Debate: Nukespeak Today. London: Frances Pinter.
Chilton, P. and Schaffner, C. 2002. " Introduction: themes and principles in the analysis of political discourse". In Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse, P. Chilton and C. Schaffner (eds), 1 - 41. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Chilton, Paul, Schaffner, Christina, 2002. Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins,
Chilton, Paul.2004.Analysing Political Discourse: theory and practice. Routledge.
Chouliaraki, Little. 2000. Political discourse in the news: democratizing responsibility or aestheticizing politics. Discourse & Society 11 (3): 293-314.
Clayman, S. and Heritage, J. 2002. The News Interview. Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clayman, S.E. 1988. 'Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews', Social Problems 35: 474-92.
Clayman, S.E. 1993. 'Reformulating the Question: A Device for Answering/Not Answering Questions in News Interviews and Press Conferences', Text 13:159-88.
Clayman, S.E. 2001. 'Answers and Evasions', Language in Society 30(3): 403-42.
CNN: Willy, W.L. 2002. http://archives.cnn.com/2002AVORLD/asiapcf/east/10/26/ china.texas/index.html
Cohen, J. 1960. 'A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales', Educational and Psychological Measurement 20: 37-46.
Collins, B. & I. Mees (1996) The phonetics of English und Dutch. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Collins, J. 2002. 'Terrorism', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
Collins, S. Keith. 1985.Responsibility and Freedom in the Press. Washington D.C: Citizen's Choice, Inc.
Connor-Linton, J. 1999. 'Competing Communicative Styles and Crosstalk: A Multifeature Analysis', Language in Society 28: 25-56.
Cook, T. 1998. Governing with the News: The News Media as a Political Institution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cornwell, E.E. Jr 1960. 'The Presidential Press Conference: A Study in Institutionalization', Midwest Journal of Political Science 4(4): 370-89.
Curran, J. 1991. "Mass Media and Democracy: A Reappraisal." In Mass Media and Society, J. Curran and M. Gurevitch (eds), 82 - 117. London: Edward Arnold.
Curran, J. and Gurevitch, M. (eds.). 1991. Mass Media and Society. London: Edward Arnold. D.M. Lewis (eds), 27 - 35. London: Routledge.
Davis, R. 1997. 'Understanding Broadcast Political Talk', Political Communication 14: 323-32.
Dickerson, P. 2001. 'Disputing with Care: Analyzing Interviewees' Treatment of Interviewers' Prior Turns in Televised Political Interviews', Discourse Studies 2: 203-222. 256 Discourse & Society 17(2)
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, George C, III. 1983. The public presidency: the pursuit of popular support. New York:St. Martin's Press.
Edwards, George C, III. 1989. At the Margins: Presidential Leadership of Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ekman, P. 2001. Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics and Marriage. New York: W.W. Norton.
Elliott, M. 2002. 'Not as Lonely as He Looks', TIME, p. 33.
Eshbaugh-Soha, Mattew.2000. " Organized Decision: "An explanation of Presidential Pubic Activity". Presented for delivery at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.
Eshbaugh-Soha, Matthew.2003. Presidential Press Conferences over Time . American Journal of Political Science 47 (2), 348-353.
Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power. New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1998. 'Political Discourse in the Media: An Analytical Framework', in A. Bell and P. Garrett (eds) Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fairclough, N. 2000. New Labour, New Language? London: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge Fairclough, N.1995. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
Fetzer, A. 2002. "'Put bluntly, you have something of a credibility problem' . Sincerity and credibility in political interviews" . In Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse, P. Chilton and C. Schaffner (eds), 173 - 201. Benjamins: Amsterdam.
Fetzer, A. and Meierkord, C. (eds) 2002. Rethinking Sequentiality: Linguistics meets Conversational Interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Fetzer, A. and Weizman, E. 2006. "Political discourse as mediated and public discourse". Journal of Pragmatics 38(2):143 - 153.
Fetzer, Anita and Lauerbach, Gerda Eva. 2007. Political Discourse in the Media: Cross-cultural perspectives (eds.). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Firth (ed.) The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace. Oxford: Pergamon.
Firth, A. (ed.). 1995. The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace. Oxford: Pergamon.
Fiske, J. 1996. Media Matters. Race and Gender in U.S. Politics.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Fowler, R. 1987. "Notes on Critical Linguistics." In Language Topics: Essays in Honor of Michael Halliday, T. Threadgold and R. Steele (eds), 481 - 492. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Fowler, R. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.
Fowler, R. 1996. 'On critical linguistics in Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis', in Coulthard, C. and Coulthard, M. (eds). London: Routledge.
Fowler, R. and Kress, G. 1979. "Critical Linguistics." In Language and Control, Fowler, B. Hodge, G Kress and T. Trew (eds), 185 - 213. London, Boston, Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Gao, Ge, and Stella Ting Toomey. (1998.. Communicating Effectively with the Chinese. California: Sage Publications Inc.
Gao, Ge. 1998. '"Don't Take My Word For It" - Understanding Chinese Speaking Practices', International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22: 163-86. Gao, G and Ting-Toomey, S. (1998) Communicating Effectively with the Chinese. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gastil, John. 1992. Undemocratic discourse: a review of theory and research on political discourse. Discourse and Society. Vol.3 (4): 469-500.
Geis, M.L. 1987. The Language of Politics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Gewertz, Ken. 2007. Vogel hopes to help expedite Sino-Japanese detente:Cautiously optimistic about 'complicated, controversial' effort to ease tensions. Harvard News Office. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/05.24/09-vogel.html
Glover, R. 2002. 'The War on____', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. London: The Penguin Press.
Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper &Row.
Greatbatch, D. 1986.Aspects of topical organization in news interviews: the use of agenda-shifting procedures by interviewees. Media, Culture and Society 8: 441-55.
Greatbatch, D. 1988. 'A Turn-Taking System for British News Interviews', Language in Society 17: 401-30.
Grice, H.P. 1975. " Logic and conversation" . In Speech Acts. (=Syntax and Semantics. Vol. III., M. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), 41 - 58. New York: Academic Press.
Hager, Gregory., and Terry Sullivan. 1994. "President-centered and Presidency-centered Explanations of Presidential Public Activity." American Journal of Political Science 38 (4):348-1079-1103.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994.An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.
Hanks, W.F. 1996. "Language form and communicative practice" . In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, J. Gumperz and S. Levinson (eds), 232 - 270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harris, S. 2001. 'Being Politically Impolite: Extending Politeness Theory to Adversarial Political Discourse', Discourse & Society 12(4): 451-72.
Harris, Sandra. 2005. Reviews. Paul Chilton: Analyzing political discourse: theory and practice. Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse. Reviews: 462-467.
Hart, C. 2005. Analysing political discourse: Toward a cognitive approach. Critical Discourse Studies Vol 2 (2): 189-194.
Have, P. ten 1999. Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
Heritage, J. and Roth, A. 1995. 'Grammar and Institution: Questions and Questioning in the Broadcast News Interview', Research on Language and Social Interaction 28:1-60.
Heritage, J. 2002. 'The Limits of Questioning: Negative Interrogatives and Hostiles Question Content', Journal of Pragmatics 34(10/11): 1427-46.
Heritage, J., dayman, S. and Zimmerman, D. 1988. 'Discourse and Message Analysis: The Micro-structure of Mass Media Messages', in R. Hawkins, S. Pingree and J.
Hess, S., 1984. The Government/Press Connection. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
Holmes, J. 1990. Hedges and boosters in women's and men's speech. Language and Communication 10.3:185-205.
Hood, Susan, 2004. Appraising Research: Taking a stance in academic writing (D).
Hooper, J.B. 1975. On assertive predicates. In J.P. Kimball, Syntur und semuntics. Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press. 91-124.
Houn, Franklin W. Winter, 1958-1959,Chinese Communist Control of the Press. The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 4. pp. 435-448. http://das.sagepub.com Vol 17(2): 173-203.
Hudson, K. 1978. The Language of Modern Politics. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics. London: Tavistock Publications Ltd. Jennings, R.M. (1967-8) 'Dramatic License in Political Broadcasts', Journal of Broadcasting 12(3): 229-46.
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Jefferson, G. 1972. 'Side Sequences', in D. Sudnow (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 294-338. New York: Free Press.
Jiang, Xiangying, 2006. Cross cultural pragmatic differences in US and Chinese Press Conferences. Discourse and Society Vol.17 (2): 237-257
Jucker, A. 1986. News Interviews: A Pragmalinguistic Analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kiirkkiiinen, E. 1996.The marking of epistemic stance in American English conversational discourse. Paper presented at the IPA conference, 4-9 July 1996, Mexico City.
Kumar, Joynt. Matha. Does This Constitute a Press Conference? :Defining and TabulatinModern Presidential Press Conferences. Presidential Studies Quarterly 33 (1):221-237.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, R.T. 1990. Talking Power: The Politics of Language in Our Lives. New York: Basic Books.
Lammers, W. 1981. 'Presidential Press-conference Schedules: Who Hides, and When?', Political Science Quarterly 96(2): 261-72.
Language Sciences 19.2: 341-56. - (1998a) I think and its Dutch equivalents in parliamentary debates. In S.
Lauerbach, G. 2004. Political Interviews as a Hybrid Genre.TEXT 24 (3): 353 - 397.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lemke, J.L. 1992. Interpersonal meaning in discourse: value orientations. In M. Davies 8z L. Ravelli, Advances in systemic linguistics. Recent theory and practice. London/New York: Pinter. 82-104.
Levinson, S. 1979. "Activity types and language" . Linguistics 17: 365 - 399.
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lysvig, P. 1975.Verbs of hedging. In J.P. Kimball, Syntax and semantics. Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press. 125-54.
Macauley, R. 1995.The adverbs of authority. English WorM-W& 16.1: 37-60.
Manheim, J.B. 1979. 'The Honeymoon's Over: The News Conference and the Development of Presidential Style', Journal of Politics 41(1): 55-74.
Mao, L.R. 1994. 'Beyond Politeness Theory: "Face" Revisited and Renewed', Journal of Pragmatics 21:451-86.
Martin J.R, White P.R.R, 2006. The Language of Evaluation. N.Y.: Palgrave.
McCarthy, E. 2002. 'Justice', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
McGuire, S. 2002. 'Splendid Isolation', Newsweek, pp. 28-9.
Muller,R.2005. Creative Metaphors in Political Discourse. www.metaphorik.de/09/mueller.pdf
Negrine, R. 1994. Politics and the Mass Media in Britain. London: Routledge.
O'Barr, W. and O'Barr, J.F. (eds) .1976. Language and Politics. Paris/The Hague: Mouton.
Otero, C.P. (ed.) 1988. Noam Chomsky: Language and Politics. Montreal: Black Rose Books.
Owen, M. 1981. 'Conversational Units and the Use of 'Well . . .'", in P. Werth (ed.) Conversation and Discourse: Structure and Interpretation, pp. 99-116. New York: St Martin's Press.
Palmer, F.R. 1986.Mood and modality. Cambridge University Press.
Persson, G. 1993.Think in a panchronic perspective. Studio Neophilologica
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Ready, E.George. 1983. The president and the press. 3 press secretaries on the presidency and the Press, Edited by Kenneth W. Thompson. New York: University Press of America.
Reinsch, J.L. 1968. 'Broadcasting the Political Conventions', Journal of Broadcasting 12(3): 219-23.
Ryfe, D.M. 1999. '"Betwixt and Between": Woodrow Wilson's Press Conferences and the Transition Toward the Modern Rhetorical Presidency', Political Communication 16: 77-93.
Sacks, H. 1995. Lectures on Conversation. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Sarangi, S. & S. Slembrouck (19%) Language, bureaucracy and social control. London: Longman.
Sarno, E.F. Jr 1968-9. 'The National Radio Conferences', Journal of Broadcasting 13(2): 189-202.
Scannell, P. (ed.) 1991. Broadcast Talk. London: Sage.
Schaffner, C. (ed.) 1997. Analyzing Political Speeches. London: Short Run Press Ltd.
Schegloff, E.A. 1972. 'Sequencing in Conversational Openings', in J. Gumperz and D.
Schegloff, E.A. 1989. 'From Interview to Confrontation: Observations on the Bush/Rather Encounter', Research on Language and Social Interaction 22: 215-40.
Schegloff, E.A. and Sacks, H. 1973. 'Opening up Closings', Semiotica 8: 289-327.
Scheithauer, Rut. 2007. Metaphors in election night television coverage in Britain, the United States and Germany. Political Discourse In the Media (eds): Fezter, A and Laurerbach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Searle, J. 1975. 'Indirect Speech Acts', in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds) Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.
Searle, J.R. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J.R. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.
Sharp, H. Jr 1968-9. 'Live from Washington: The Telecasting of President Kennedy's News Conferences', Journal of Broadcasting 13(1): 23-32.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. 1996.Image-building through modality: the case of political interviews. Discourse & Society 7.3: 389-415.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M.1997. Modal (un)certainty in political discourse: a functional account. Language Science, Vol. 19, No.4:341-356.
Simon-Vandenbergen,A.-M,White,ER.,and Aijmer.K,2007.Presupposition and 'taking-for-granted' in mass communicated political argument:An illustration from British,Flemish,and Swedish political colloquy.Political discourse in the media(eds).Benjamins Publishing Company.
Smith,C.1990.Presidential Press Conferences:A Critical Approach.New York:Praeger Publishers.
Smith,C.A.and Smith,K.B.1994.The White House Speaks:Presidential Leadership as Persuasion.Westport:Praeger Publishers.
Swales,J.M.1990.Genre Analysis:English in Academic and Research Settings.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Taylor,EM.1997.Global Communications,International Affairs and the Media Since 1945.London:Routledge.
Thompson,J.1995.The media and Modernity.A Social Theory of the Media.Cambridge:Polity Press.
Van Dijk,T.A.1993.'Principles in Critical Discourse Analysis',Discourse & Society 4(2):249-83.
Van Dijk,T.A.1995.'Discourse,Opinions and Ideologies',in C.Schaeffner and H.K.Holmes(eds)Current Issues in Language and Society,pp.115-45.Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Van Dijk,T.A.1998.'Opinions and Ideologies in the Press',in A.Bell and E Garrett(eds)Approaches to Media Discourse.Oxford:Blackwell.
VandeHei,J.and DeYoung,K.2002.'Bush Presses Congress for Broader Power to Act on Iraq',International Herald Tribune,p.1.
Vandenbergen,Anne-Marie Simon,White,Peter R.R.,Aijmer Karin.2007.Presupposition and 'taking-for-granted' in mass communicated political argument:An illustration from British,Flemish and Swedish political colloquy in Political Discourse in the media(eds) by Fezter.Vestergaard,Torben,2000.Political discourse and the discourse of politicians.International-Journal of Applied Linguistics 10(3):3-6
White,P.R.,1998.Telling Media Tales:the news story as rhetoric.[D],University of Sydney.
Wilkins,K.G.2000.'The Role of Media in Public Disengagement from Political Life',Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44(4):569-80.
Wilson,J.1990.Politically Speaking.Oxford:Blackwell.
Wodak(ed.) Language,Power and Ideology:Studies in Political Discourse.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wodak,R.1989.'1968:The Power of Political Jargon-a "Club-2" Discussion',in R.
Wodak,R.1996.Disorders of Discourse.New York:Longman.
Wodak,R.and Meyer,M.(eds) 2001.Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis.London:Sage.
Yang,Caiying.2006.Interpersonal Coherence in News Interviews(D).Shangdong University.
Yu,D.H.and Gu,B.L.1990.'Zhong Guo Ren de Qing Mian Jiao Lu(Chinese face concerns)',Zhong Guo Ren de Xin Li 3:63-107.
董育宁,2007.新闻评论语篇的语言研究[D],复旦大学
方琰,余渭深,1998.语境·语篇·语类[A].余渭深,等主编.《语言的功能-系统、语用和认知》[C].重庆:重庆大学出版社
房红梅,2005.言据性的系统功能研究[D],复旦大学
胡壮麟,1994.《语篇的衔接与连贯》[M].上海外语教育出版社
胡壮麟 朱永生 张德禄,1989.《系统功能语法概论》[M].湖南教育出版社
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,李战子,2005.《系统功能语言学概论》.北京:北大出版社
蓝鸿文,记者招待会和新闻发布会,《新闻界》,1999(3)
蓝鸿文,我国记者招待会的由来,《新闻战线》,2005(4)
蓝鸿文,抗日战争时期的记者招待会,《采写编》,2006(2)
蓝鸿文,解放战争时期的记者招待会,《采写编》,2006(3)
蓝鸿文,新中国成立后的记者招待会,采写编》,2006(4)
李战子,情态-从句子到语篇的推广,《外语学刊》,2000(4):7-12
李基安,1999.情态意义和情态助动词意义[J],外国语(4)
李基安,2000.将来和将来时[J],《外国语》(4)
李基安,2000.现代英语语法[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
刘文英,2007.从批评语言分析角度浅析中国政府记者招待会:朱镕基政府记者招待会个案研究[MA].北京语言文化大学
任绍曾,2003.语篇的多维分析,《外国语》(3):35-42
王振华,2001.评价系统及其运作,《外国语》(6):13-20
王振华,2004.硬新闻的态度研究,《外语教学》(5):31-36
杨才英,2006,新闻访谈中的人机连贯研究[D],山东大学
杨坚定,2004.双重人际关系-对英语问答式招生广告的语类的分析,《外国语》:42-49
张德禄,1998:8-14.话语基调的范围及其体现[J].外语教学与研究
赵鸿燕,2007.政府记者招待会:历史,功能与策略[M],北京:中国传媒大学出版社
朱洪涛,2003.英语广告语篇中人称、语气的人际功能,《山东外语教学》(2).:101-105
朱永生,2004.功能语言学导论[M],上海:上海外语教育出版社
朱永生,2005.语境动态研究[M],北京:北京大学出版社
Atkinson, M. 1984. Our masters' voices. The language and body language of politics. LondodNew York: Methuen.
Atkinson, M. 1988. Our Masters' Voices: The Language and Body Language of Politics. London: Routledge.
Barkin, S.M. 1983. 'Eisenhower's Television Planning Board: An Unwritten Chapter in the History of Political Broadcasting', Journal of Broadcasting 27(4): 319-31.
Bayley,Paul. 2004. Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse (ed.). John Benjamins. Beebe, L.M. and Takahashi, T. 1989.'Sociolinguistic Variation in Face-Threatening Speech Acts', in M.R. Eisenstein (ed.), The Dynamic Interlanguage: Empirical Studies in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 199-218.. New York: Plenum.
Beebe, L.M., Takahashi, T. and Uliss-Weltz, R. 1990. 'Pragmatic Transfer in ESL Refusals', in R. Scarcella, E. Anderson and S. Krashen (eds) Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language, pp. 55-73. New York: Newbury House.
Bell, A. and Garrett, P. (eds) .1998.Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bell, D.V.J. 1995. 'Negotiation in the Workplace: The View from a Political Linguist', in A.
Bettinghaus, E.P. and Cody, M.J. 1994. Persuasive Communication. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Bhatia, Aditi. 2006. Critical discourse analysis of political press conferences. Discourse & Society
Biber, D., Conrad, S. and Reppen, R. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Biletzki, A. 1997.Talking Wolves: Thomas Hobbes on the Language of Politics and the Politics of Language. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Blum-Kulka, S. and Olshtain, E. 1984. 'Requests and Apologies: A Cross Cultural Study of Speech Act Realization Patterns', Applied Linguistics 5:196-213.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J. and Kasper, G. (eds) .1989. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Brace, Paul, and Barbara Hinckley.1992. Follow the leader: opinion polls and the Modern presidents. New York: Basic Books.
Brown, G. and Yule, G. 1983.Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. 1990. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bublitz, W. 1992. Transferred negation and modality. Journal of Pragmatics 18: 551-77.
Bull, P. 1994. 'On Identifying Questions, Replies, and Non-replies in Political Interviews', Journal of Language and Social Psychology 13:115-31.
Bull, P. 1998. 'Equivocation Theory and News Interviews', Journal of Language and Social Psychology 17: 36-51.
Bull, P. and Mayer, K. 1993. 'How Not to Answer Questions in Political Interviews', Political Psychology 14: 651-66.
Burnard, L. (ed.) 1995. Users reference guide for the British National Corpus. Version 1.0. Oxford University Computing Services.
Bush, G2002.http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020221-7.html
Cameron, D. 2003. "Globalizing 'communication'." In New Media Language, J. Aitchison and Chafe, W. 1986. Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe & J. Nichols, Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology. Nonvood, N.J.: Ablex. 261-72.
Chan, V.P.K. 2002a. 'US to Restart Talks on Rights', South China Morning Post (26 October): 1. Chan, V.P.K. 2002b. 'China and US Find Common Goal', South China Morning Post (27 October): p. 1.
Chen, X., Ye, L. and Zhang, Y. 1995. 'Refusing in Chinese', in G. Kasper (ed.) Pragmatics of Chinese as a Native and Target Language, pp. 119-63. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
Cheng, M. 2002. 'The Standoff - What is Unsaid? A Pragmatic Analysis of the Conditional Marker "If", Discourse & Society 13(3): 309-17.
Chilton, P. (ed.) 1985. Language and the Nuclear Arms Debate: Nukespeak Today. London: Frances Pinter.
Chilton, P. and Schaffner, C. 2002. " Introduction: themes and principles in the analysis of political discourse". In Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse, P. Chilton and C. Schaffner (eds), 1 - 41. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Chilton, Paul, Schaffner, Christina, 2002. Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins,
Chilton, Paul.2004.Analysing Political Discourse: theory and practice. Routledge.
Chouliaraki, Little. 2000. Political discourse in the news: democratizing responsibility or aestheticizing politics. Discourse & Society 11 (3): 293-314.
Clayman, S. and Heritage, J. 2002. The News Interview. Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clayman, S.E. 1988. 'Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews', Social Problems 35: 474-92.
Clayman, S.E. 1993. 'Reformulating the Question: A Device for Answering/Not Answering Questions in News Interviews and Press Conferences', Text 13:159-88.
Clayman, S.E. 2001. 'Answers and Evasions', Language in Society 30(3): 403-42.
CNN: Willy, W.L. 2002. http://archives.cnn.com/2002AVORLD/asiapcf/east/10/26/ china.texas/index.html
Cohen, J. 1960. 'A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales', Educational and Psychological Measurement 20: 37-46.
Collins, B. & I. Mees (1996) The phonetics of English und Dutch. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Collins, J. 2002. 'Terrorism', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
Collins, S. Keith. 1985.Responsibility and Freedom in the Press. Washington D.C: Citizen's Choice, Inc.
Connor-Linton, J. 1999. 'Competing Communicative Styles and Crosstalk: A Multifeature Analysis', Language in Society 28: 25-56.
Cook, T. 1998. Governing with the News: The News Media as a Political Institution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cornwell, E.E. Jr 1960. 'The Presidential Press Conference: A Study in Institutionalization', Midwest Journal of Political Science 4(4): 370-89.
Curran, J. 1991. "Mass Media and Democracy: A Reappraisal." In Mass Media and Society, J. Curran and M. Gurevitch (eds), 82 - 117. London: Edward Arnold.
Curran, J. and Gurevitch, M. (eds.). 1991. Mass Media and Society. London: Edward Arnold. D.M. Lewis (eds), 27 - 35. London: Routledge.
Davis, R. 1997. 'Understanding Broadcast Political Talk', Political Communication 14: 323-32.
Dickerson, P. 2001. 'Disputing with Care: Analyzing Interviewees' Treatment of Interviewers' Prior Turns in Televised Political Interviews', Discourse Studies 2: 203-222. 256 Discourse & Society 17(2)
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, George C, III. 1983. The public presidency: the pursuit of popular support. New York:St. Martin's Press.
Edwards, George C, III. 1989. At the Margins: Presidential Leadership of Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ekman, P. 2001. Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics and Marriage. New York: W.W. Norton.
Elliott, M. 2002. 'Not as Lonely as He Looks', TIME, p. 33.
Eshbaugh-Soha, Mattew.2000. " Organized Decision: "An explanation of Presidential Pubic Activity". Presented for delivery at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.
Eshbaugh-Soha, Matthew.2003. Presidential Press Conferences over Time . American Journal of Political Science 47 (2), 348-353.
Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power. New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 1998. 'Political Discourse in the Media: An Analytical Framework', in A. Bell and P. Garrett (eds) Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fairclough, N. 2000. New Labour, New Language? London: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge Fairclough, N.1995. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
Fetzer, A. 2002. "'Put bluntly, you have something of a credibility problem' . Sincerity and credibility in political interviews" . In Politics as Text and Talk: Analytical Approaches to Political Discourse, P. Chilton and C. Schaffner (eds), 173 - 201. Benjamins: Amsterdam.
Fetzer, A. and Meierkord, C. (eds) 2002. Rethinking Sequentiality: Linguistics meets Conversational Interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Fetzer, A. and Weizman, E. 2006. "Political discourse as mediated and public discourse". Journal of Pragmatics 38(2):143 - 153.
Fetzer, Anita and Lauerbach, Gerda Eva. 2007. Political Discourse in the Media: Cross-cultural perspectives (eds.). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Firth (ed.) The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace. Oxford: Pergamon.
Firth, A. (ed.). 1995. The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace. Oxford: Pergamon.
Fiske, J. 1996. Media Matters. Race and Gender in U.S. Politics.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Fowler, R. 1987. "Notes on Critical Linguistics." In Language Topics: Essays in Honor of Michael Halliday, T. Threadgold and R. Steele (eds), 481 - 492. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Fowler, R. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.
Fowler, R. 1996. 'On critical linguistics in Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis', in Coulthard, C. and Coulthard, M. (eds). London: Routledge.
Fowler, R. and Kress, G. 1979. "Critical Linguistics." In Language and Control, Fowler, B. Hodge, G Kress and T. Trew (eds), 185 - 213. London, Boston, Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Gao, Ge, and Stella Ting Toomey. (1998.. Communicating Effectively with the Chinese. California: Sage Publications Inc.
Gao, Ge. 1998. '"Don't Take My Word For It" - Understanding Chinese Speaking Practices', International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22: 163-86. Gao, G and Ting-Toomey, S. (1998) Communicating Effectively with the Chinese. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gastil, John. 1992. Undemocratic discourse: a review of theory and research on political discourse. Discourse and Society. Vol.3 (4): 469-500.
Geis, M.L. 1987. The Language of Politics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Gewertz, Ken. 2007. Vogel hopes to help expedite Sino-Japanese detente:Cautiously optimistic about 'complicated, controversial' effort to ease tensions. Harvard News Office. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/05.24/09-vogel.html
Glover, R. 2002. 'The War on____', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. London: The Penguin Press.
Goffman, E. 1974. Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper &Row.
Greatbatch, D. 1986.Aspects of topical organization in news interviews: the use of agenda-shifting procedures by interviewees. Media, Culture and Society 8: 441-55.
Greatbatch, D. 1988. 'A Turn-Taking System for British News Interviews', Language in Society 17: 401-30.
Grice, H.P. 1975. " Logic and conversation" . In Speech Acts. (=Syntax and Semantics. Vol. III., M. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), 41 - 58. New York: Academic Press.
Hager, Gregory., and Terry Sullivan. 1994. "President-centered and Presidency-centered Explanations of Presidential Public Activity." American Journal of Political Science 38 (4):348-1079-1103.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994.An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.
Hanks, W.F. 1996. "Language form and communicative practice" . In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, J. Gumperz and S. Levinson (eds), 232 - 270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harris, S. 2001. 'Being Politically Impolite: Extending Politeness Theory to Adversarial Political Discourse', Discourse & Society 12(4): 451-72.
Harris, Sandra. 2005. Reviews. Paul Chilton: Analyzing political discourse: theory and practice. Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse. Reviews: 462-467.
Hart, C. 2005. Analysing political discourse: Toward a cognitive approach. Critical Discourse Studies Vol 2 (2): 189-194.
Have, P. ten 1999. Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
Heritage, J. and Roth, A. 1995. 'Grammar and Institution: Questions and Questioning in the Broadcast News Interview', Research on Language and Social Interaction 28:1-60.
Heritage, J. 2002. 'The Limits of Questioning: Negative Interrogatives and Hostiles Question Content', Journal of Pragmatics 34(10/11): 1427-46.
Heritage, J., dayman, S. and Zimmerman, D. 1988. 'Discourse and Message Analysis: The Micro-structure of Mass Media Messages', in R. Hawkins, S. Pingree and J.
Hess, S., 1984. The Government/Press Connection. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
Holmes, J. 1990. Hedges and boosters in women's and men's speech. Language and Communication 10.3:185-205.
Hood, Susan, 2004. Appraising Research: Taking a stance in academic writing (D).
Hooper, J.B. 1975. On assertive predicates. In J.P. Kimball, Syntur und semuntics. Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press. 91-124.
Houn, Franklin W. Winter, 1958-1959,Chinese Communist Control of the Press. The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 4. pp. 435-448. http://das.sagepub.com Vol 17(2): 173-203.
Hudson, K. 1978. The Language of Modern Politics. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics. London: Tavistock Publications Ltd. Jennings, R.M. (1967-8) 'Dramatic License in Political Broadcasts', Journal of Broadcasting 12(3): 229-46.
Hymes, D. 1974. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Jefferson, G. 1972. 'Side Sequences', in D. Sudnow (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction, pp. 294-338. New York: Free Press.
Jiang, Xiangying, 2006. Cross cultural pragmatic differences in US and Chinese Press Conferences. Discourse and Society Vol.17 (2): 237-257
Jucker, A. 1986. News Interviews: A Pragmalinguistic Analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kiirkkiiinen, E. 1996.The marking of epistemic stance in American English conversational discourse. Paper presented at the IPA conference, 4-9 July 1996, Mexico City.
Kumar, Joynt. Matha. Does This Constitute a Press Conference? :Defining and TabulatinModern Presidential Press Conferences. Presidential Studies Quarterly 33 (1):221-237.
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, R.T. 1990. Talking Power: The Politics of Language in Our Lives. New York: Basic Books.
Lammers, W. 1981. 'Presidential Press-conference Schedules: Who Hides, and When?', Political Science Quarterly 96(2): 261-72.
Language Sciences 19.2: 341-56. - (1998a) I think and its Dutch equivalents in parliamentary debates. In S.
Lauerbach, G. 2004. Political Interviews as a Hybrid Genre.TEXT 24 (3): 353 - 397.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lemke, J.L. 1992. Interpersonal meaning in discourse: value orientations. In M. Davies 8z L. Ravelli, Advances in systemic linguistics. Recent theory and practice. London/New York: Pinter. 82-104.
Levinson, S. 1979. "Activity types and language" . Linguistics 17: 365 - 399.
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lysvig, P. 1975.Verbs of hedging. In J.P. Kimball, Syntax and semantics. Vol. 4. New York: Academic Press. 125-54.
Macauley, R. 1995.The adverbs of authority. English WorM-W& 16.1: 37-60.
Manheim, J.B. 1979. 'The Honeymoon's Over: The News Conference and the Development of Presidential Style', Journal of Politics 41(1): 55-74.
Mao, L.R. 1994. 'Beyond Politeness Theory: "Face" Revisited and Renewed', Journal of Pragmatics 21:451-86.
Martin J.R, White P.R.R, 2006. The Language of Evaluation. N.Y.: Palgrave.
McCarthy, E. 2002. 'Justice', in J. Collins and R. Glover (eds) Collateral Language: A User's Guide to America's New War. New York: New York University Press.
McGuire, S. 2002. 'Splendid Isolation', Newsweek, pp. 28-9.
Muller,R.2005. Creative Metaphors in Political Discourse. www.metaphorik.de/09/mueller.pdf
Negrine, R. 1994. Politics and the Mass Media in Britain. London: Routledge.
O'Barr, W. and O'Barr, J.F. (eds) .1976. Language and Politics. Paris/The Hague: Mouton.
Otero, C.P. (ed.) 1988. Noam Chomsky: Language and Politics. Montreal: Black Rose Books.
Owen, M. 1981. 'Conversational Units and the Use of 'Well . . .'", in P. Werth (ed.) Conversation and Discourse: Structure and Interpretation, pp. 99-116. New York: St Martin's Press.
Palmer, F.R. 1986.Mood and modality. Cambridge University Press.
Persson, G. 1993.Think in a panchronic perspective. Studio Neophilologica
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Ready, E.George. 1983. The president and the press. 3 press secretaries on the presidency and the Press, Edited by Kenneth W. Thompson. New York: University Press of America.
Reinsch, J.L. 1968. 'Broadcasting the Political Conventions', Journal of Broadcasting 12(3): 219-23.
Ryfe, D.M. 1999. '"Betwixt and Between": Woodrow Wilson's Press Conferences and the Transition Toward the Modern Rhetorical Presidency', Political Communication 16: 77-93.
Sacks, H. 1995. Lectures on Conversation. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Sarangi, S. & S. Slembrouck (19%) Language, bureaucracy and social control. London: Longman.
Sarno, E.F. Jr 1968-9. 'The National Radio Conferences', Journal of Broadcasting 13(2): 189-202.
Scannell, P. (ed.) 1991. Broadcast Talk. London: Sage.
Schaffner, C. (ed.) 1997. Analyzing Political Speeches. London: Short Run Press Ltd.
Schegloff, E.A. 1972. 'Sequencing in Conversational Openings', in J. Gumperz and D.
Schegloff, E.A. 1989. 'From Interview to Confrontation: Observations on the Bush/Rather Encounter', Research on Language and Social Interaction 22: 215-40.
Schegloff, E.A. and Sacks, H. 1973. 'Opening up Closings', Semiotica 8: 289-327.
Scheithauer, Rut. 2007. Metaphors in election night television coverage in Britain, the United States and Germany. Political Discourse In the Media (eds): Fezter, A and Laurerbach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Searle, J. 1975. 'Indirect Speech Acts', in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds) Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press.
Searle, J.R. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J.R. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.
Sharp, H. Jr 1968-9. 'Live from Washington: The Telecasting of President Kennedy's News Conferences', Journal of Broadcasting 13(1): 23-32.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. 1996.Image-building through modality: the case of political interviews. Discourse & Society 7.3: 389-415.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M.1997. Modal (un)certainty in political discourse: a functional account. Language Science, Vol. 19, No.4:341-356.
Simon-Vandenbergen,A.-M,White,ER.,and Aijmer.K,2007.Presupposition and 'taking-for-granted' in mass communicated political argument:An illustration from British,Flemish,and Swedish political colloquy.Political discourse in the media(eds).Benjamins Publishing Company.
Smith,C.1990.Presidential Press Conferences:A Critical Approach.New York:Praeger Publishers.
Smith,C.A.and Smith,K.B.1994.The White House Speaks:Presidential Leadership as Persuasion.Westport:Praeger Publishers.
Swales,J.M.1990.Genre Analysis:English in Academic and Research Settings.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Taylor,EM.1997.Global Communications,International Affairs and the Media Since 1945.London:Routledge.
Thompson,J.1995.The media and Modernity.A Social Theory of the Media.Cambridge:Polity Press.
Van Dijk,T.A.1993.'Principles in Critical Discourse Analysis',Discourse & Society 4(2):249-83.
Van Dijk,T.A.1995.'Discourse,Opinions and Ideologies',in C.Schaeffner and H.K.Holmes(eds)Current Issues in Language and Society,pp.115-45.Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Van Dijk,T.A.1998.'Opinions and Ideologies in the Press',in A.Bell and E Garrett(eds)Approaches to Media Discourse.Oxford:Blackwell.
VandeHei,J.and DeYoung,K.2002.'Bush Presses Congress for Broader Power to Act on Iraq',International Herald Tribune,p.1.
Vandenbergen,Anne-Marie Simon,White,Peter R.R.,Aijmer Karin.2007.Presupposition and 'taking-for-granted' in mass communicated political argument:An illustration from British,Flemish and Swedish political colloquy in Political Discourse in the media(eds) by Fezter.Vestergaard,Torben,2000.Political discourse and the discourse of politicians.International-Journal of Applied Linguistics 10(3):3-6
White,P.R.,1998.Telling Media Tales:the news story as rhetoric.[D],University of Sydney.
Wilkins,K.G.2000.'The Role of Media in Public Disengagement from Political Life',Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 44(4):569-80.
Wilson,J.1990.Politically Speaking.Oxford:Blackwell.
Wodak(ed.) Language,Power and Ideology:Studies in Political Discourse.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wodak,R.1989.'1968:The Power of Political Jargon-a "Club-2" Discussion',in R.
Wodak,R.1996.Disorders of Discourse.New York:Longman.
Wodak,R.and Meyer,M.(eds) 2001.Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis.London:Sage.
Yang,Caiying.2006.Interpersonal Coherence in News Interviews(D).Shangdong University.
Yu,D.H.and Gu,B.L.1990.'Zhong Guo Ren de Qing Mian Jiao Lu(Chinese face concerns)',Zhong Guo Ren de Xin Li 3:63-107.
董育宁,2007.新闻评论语篇的语言研究[D],复旦大学
方琰,余渭深,1998.语境·语篇·语类[A].余渭深,等主编.《语言的功能-系统、语用和认知》[C].重庆:重庆大学出版社
房红梅,2005.言据性的系统功能研究[D],复旦大学
胡壮麟,1994.《语篇的衔接与连贯》[M].上海外语教育出版社
胡壮麟 朱永生 张德禄,1989.《系统功能语法概论》[M].湖南教育出版社
胡壮麟,朱永生,张德禄,李战子,2005.《系统功能语言学概论》.北京:北大出版社
蓝鸿文,记者招待会和新闻发布会,《新闻界》,1999(3)
蓝鸿文,我国记者招待会的由来,《新闻战线》,2005(4)
蓝鸿文,抗日战争时期的记者招待会,《采写编》,2006(2)
蓝鸿文,解放战争时期的记者招待会,《采写编》,2006(3)
蓝鸿文,新中国成立后的记者招待会,采写编》,2006(4)
李战子,情态-从句子到语篇的推广,《外语学刊》,2000(4):7-12
李基安,1999.情态意义和情态助动词意义[J],外国语(4)
李基安,2000.将来和将来时[J],《外国语》(4)
李基安,2000.现代英语语法[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社
刘文英,2007.从批评语言分析角度浅析中国政府记者招待会:朱镕基政府记者招待会个案研究[MA].北京语言文化大学
任绍曾,2003.语篇的多维分析,《外国语》(3):35-42
王振华,2001.评价系统及其运作,《外国语》(6):13-20
王振华,2004.硬新闻的态度研究,《外语教学》(5):31-36
杨才英,2006,新闻访谈中的人机连贯研究[D],山东大学
杨坚定,2004.双重人际关系-对英语问答式招生广告的语类的分析,《外国语》:42-49
张德禄,1998:8-14.话语基调的范围及其体现[J].外语教学与研究
赵鸿燕,2007.政府记者招待会:历史,功能与策略[M],北京:中国传媒大学出版社
朱洪涛,2003.英语广告语篇中人称、语气的人际功能,《山东外语教学》(2).:101-105
朱永生,2004.功能语言学导论[M],上海:上海外语教育出版社
朱永生,2005.语境动态研究[M],北京:北京大学出版社
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |