绿色的阴影

Pub Date : 2022-06-23 DOI:10.1163/18773109-01402001
D. Ponton
{"title":"绿色的阴影","authors":"D. Ponton","doi":"10.1163/18773109-01402001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Discursive interaction involves the co-construction of meaning between interlocutor/s and intended audience, a process which involves both explicit and implicit meanings (Kecskes 2016). However, since language is at best an imprecise tool for describing reality, even so-called explicit meanings are found to require effort to disambiguate, and true precision may not be attainable, despite sincerity on the part of the speaker/s. These aspects are especially relevant in considering public discourse on the environment, which represents a macro topic whose component discursive features are frequently big words in the sense originally identified by George Orwell (2013), i.e. nature, pollution, fossil fuels, conservation, green energy, global warming, climate change, etc. That is to say, their use signals the presence of ideologies (Fairclough 2003), deontologies (Roderick 2013), presuppositions (Levinson 1983) and naturalisations (Barthes 1957) which imply the use of meanings that are seldom self-evident, though they are presented as such. This paper explores interactions in the public domain about the current environmental crisis, showing how a pragmatic perspective that focuses on situated understandings of shared dialogue can illuminate these issues.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shades of green\",\"authors\":\"D. Ponton\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18773109-01402001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Discursive interaction involves the co-construction of meaning between interlocutor/s and intended audience, a process which involves both explicit and implicit meanings (Kecskes 2016). However, since language is at best an imprecise tool for describing reality, even so-called explicit meanings are found to require effort to disambiguate, and true precision may not be attainable, despite sincerity on the part of the speaker/s. These aspects are especially relevant in considering public discourse on the environment, which represents a macro topic whose component discursive features are frequently big words in the sense originally identified by George Orwell (2013), i.e. nature, pollution, fossil fuels, conservation, green energy, global warming, climate change, etc. That is to say, their use signals the presence of ideologies (Fairclough 2003), deontologies (Roderick 2013), presuppositions (Levinson 1983) and naturalisations (Barthes 1957) which imply the use of meanings that are seldom self-evident, though they are presented as such. This paper explores interactions in the public domain about the current environmental crisis, showing how a pragmatic perspective that focuses on situated understandings of shared dialogue can illuminate these issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01402001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01402001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

话语互动涉及对话者和目标受众之间意义的共同建构,这一过程既涉及显性意义,也涉及隐性意义(凯斯克,2016)。然而,由于语言充其量只是描述现实的一种不精确的工具,即使是所谓的明确意义也需要努力去消除歧义,而真正的精确可能无法实现,尽管说话者有诚意。这些方面在考虑关于环境的公共话语时尤为重要,因为环境是一个宏观话题,其组成话语特征往往是乔治·奥威尔(2013)最初确定的意义上的大词,即自然、污染、化石燃料、保护、绿色能源、全球变暖、气候变化等。也就是说,它们的使用标志着意识形态(Fairclough 2003)、义务论(Roderick 2013)、预设(Levinson 1983)和归化(Barthes 1957)的存在,这意味着使用的意义很少是自明的,尽管它们是这样呈现的。本文探讨了公共领域中关于当前环境危机的互动,展示了注重对共享对话的情境理解的实用主义视角如何阐明这些问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
Shades of green
Discursive interaction involves the co-construction of meaning between interlocutor/s and intended audience, a process which involves both explicit and implicit meanings (Kecskes 2016). However, since language is at best an imprecise tool for describing reality, even so-called explicit meanings are found to require effort to disambiguate, and true precision may not be attainable, despite sincerity on the part of the speaker/s. These aspects are especially relevant in considering public discourse on the environment, which represents a macro topic whose component discursive features are frequently big words in the sense originally identified by George Orwell (2013), i.e. nature, pollution, fossil fuels, conservation, green energy, global warming, climate change, etc. That is to say, their use signals the presence of ideologies (Fairclough 2003), deontologies (Roderick 2013), presuppositions (Levinson 1983) and naturalisations (Barthes 1957) which imply the use of meanings that are seldom self-evident, though they are presented as such. This paper explores interactions in the public domain about the current environmental crisis, showing how a pragmatic perspective that focuses on situated understandings of shared dialogue can illuminate these issues.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1