学术论文摘要研究的修辞评价视角 [5]
论文作者:www.51lunwen.org论文属性:硕士毕业论文 thesis登出时间:2014-03-16编辑:hynh1021点击率:13037
论文字数:54320论文编号:org201403151756267601语种:英语 English地区:中国价格:$ 66
关键词:New RhetoricRhetoric-AppraisalApproach评价理论新修辞学修辞评价视角
摘要:不同类别的“修辞评价资源”在使用中存在较大差异。摘要作者不使用同情认同修辞策略,而更倾向于使用误认同策略。摘要作者较多地使用了鉴赏资源来实现误认同的修辞策略,这是因为人们对“美”有共同的追求,通过诱导受众向完美的事物看齐,就可以在不知不觉间诱导受众形成某种态度或进行某种合作
ons.(1) This research is of both theoretical and practical significance. Its theoreticalvalue lies in that it not only provides empirical evidence for Kenneth Burke's NewRhetoric, which is applicable to analyze academic abstracts, but also offers (byincorporating Burke’s ideas with the Appraisal Theory) a new direction for applyingBurke’s ideas. At the practical level, it is helpful for researchers to write effectiveabstracts or translate abstracts effectively. On one hand, they can guide people inwriting or translating academic abstracts; on the other hand, they can help people betterunderstand the rhetorical strategies and techniques authors use in their papers in orderto make readers identify with their claims.59Chapter 5 ConclusionThe paper has made a tentative study of abstracts under the framework of thenewly developed Rhetoric-Appraisal Approach. Tentative as it is, the study has provedthat the approach is applicable in explaining this kind of discourse. The chapter firstpoints out the major findings of the study, followed by the implications and limitationsof the study and some suggestions for further studies.5.1 Major findingsThe paper has four achievements: 1) it not only provides empirical evidence forKenneth Burke's New Rhetoric, but also offers (by incorporating Burke’s ideas withthe Appraisal Theory) a new direction for applying Burke’s ideas; 2) it constructs anew theoretical framework for discourse analysis which can be used to analyze bothsurface structures and rhetorical motives underneath; 3) it validates the effectiveness ofthe new framework by analyzing 32 abstracts; 4) the analysis provides explorativeinquiry into rhetorical motives hidden within academic abstracts paving the way forfuture studies on abstracts. The study found that:(1) In the abstracts studied, authors mainly use Inaccuracy resources whenorganizing their abstracts, which well indicate the existence of rhetorical strategiesalthough academic writings are required to be as objective as possible.(2) Distribution of the three categories of Rhetoric-Appraisal resources variesgreatly. The authors of English abstracts do not use Sympathy or Antithesis resourcesat all. Authors of Chinese abstracts do not use Sympathy resources either, but they usesome Antithesis resources, the average percentage of which is 11.18% in Chineseabstracts.(3) Both authors of the English abstracts and those of the Chinese abstracts do notuse any Sympathy resources because Sympathy Affect is explicitly subjective(2) Select rhetorical strategies and rhetorical resources in accordance with thecontext involved. Some scholars (Hyland 2002; Zhang Man 2008) would like tocriticize the Chinese preference of not using 1stperson deixis and advocate the westernpreference of using 1stperson deixis. Zhang Man even regards the Chinese practice asold-fashioned and ill-formed. The truth is, if abstract is an interactive rhetoricaldiscourse through which the speaker tries to induce attitudes or co-operation amongaudience, it is not advised to have a fixed arrangement of rhetorical strategies andresources for any abstracts. If westerners prefer 1stperson deixis we use 1stpersondeixis when we want to get an article published in international journals and if Chinesedo not prefer 1stperson deixis we do not use 1stperson deixis when we want to get anarticle published in China.
5.3 Limitations and suggestions for future study
Notwithstanding the positive con本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。