西西河

主题:【原创】警惕流失的话语权-“公正”媒体新闻解析 1加视频 -- 草纹

共:💬149 🌺251 新:
全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖
家园 问题可能在对话语和话语权的理解上

下面是wiki对话语的定义:

Discourse (L. discursus, "running to and from") means either "written or spoken communication or debate" or "a formal discussion or debate" [1]. The term is often used in semantics and discourse analysis.

In semantics, discourses are linguistic units composed of several sentences; in other words, conversations, arguments, or speeches. In discourse analysis, which came to prominence in the late 1960s, the word "discourse" is shorthand for "discursive formation", which is what Michel Foucault called communication that involves specialized knowledge of various kinds. It is in this sense that the word is most often used in academic studies.

Studies of discourse have been carried out within a variety of traditions that investigate the relations between language, structure and agency, including feminist studies, anthropology, enthnography, cultural studies, literary theory and the history of ideas. Within these fields, the notion of discourse is itself subject to discourse, that is, debated on the basis of specialized knowledge. Discourse can be observed in the use of spoken, written and signed language and multimodal/multimedia forms of communication, and is not found only in 'non-fictional' or verbal materials.

In the social sciences (following the work of Michel Foucault), a discourse is considered to be an institutionalized way of thinking, a social boundary defining what can be said about a specific topic, or, as Judith Butler puts it, "the limits of acceptable speech"—or possible truth. Discourses are seen to affect our views on all things; it is not possible to escape discourse. For example, two notably distinct discourses can be used about various guerrilla movements describing them either as "freedom fighters" or "terrorists". In other words, the chosen discourse delivers the vocabulary, expressions and perhaps also the style needed to communicate. Discourse is closely linked to different theories of power and state, at least as long as defining discourses is seen to mean defining reality itself.

This conception of discourse is largely derived from the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault (see below)

您当然知道这是一个六十年代兴起的左翼词:产生于欧洲,被美国高校自由左派放大,最后进入媒体和日常运用。不同意这个被用烂了的词的含义的人,可能认为这个词和话语权只是左派学术的黑话,或者说对一种研究方式和思维方式的信仰(?)。

正像wiki 说的。defining discourses is seen to mean defining reality itself。为什么这样?因为话语分析和话语权的探讨很大程度上本身就是一种话语实践(自由左派?法兰克福学派?福柯派?)。它并不注重“事实”(很多人根本就否定有话语之外的“事实”,但并不是说要像cult那样故意扭曲事实),更注意媒体、对话、文字中的“权力关系”。

也许草纹这个例子确实不是那么切中“事实”全貌,但是它的重点不在于分析“事实”是什么,而是在于找到:1、an institutionalized way of thinking;2、the limits of acceptable speech;当然还可以不那么准确地换成思维模式、权力关系、操弄“真相”的方法等说法。

如果您根本不相信这些文科的高校的左派的看问题的方式,那么其实也不必在意了。不过,愚笨如我,认为这样的分析角度在某种程度上是有效的。

当然,您也可以说是有限的

全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河