网民是社会达尔文主义者吗?中美贸易战网络讨论中中国生存话语的重新语境化

IF 0.8 3区 文学 Q3 COMMUNICATION Text & Talk Pub Date : 2022-09-09 DOI:10.1515/text-2021-0039
Qing Liu
{"title":"网民是社会达尔文主义者吗?中美贸易战网络讨论中中国生存话语的重新语境化","authors":"Qing Liu","doi":"10.1515/text-2021-0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Survival discourse has emerged as a prominent theme in online discussions about the US–China trade war on the Chinese social media platform Zhihu. This study undertakes a critical discourse analysis of this emergent discourse by examining 80 answers (totaling 95,753 words) from Zhihu users within the broader context of the invocation of survival discourses in modern Chinese history. An intertextual method was adopted in this study, which helps us to better understand netizens’ arguments in favor of the Chinese government’s tough stance on the trade war with the US and the probable success of this strategy. The analysis reveals the historicity and intertextuality of these discourses, identifies strategies which are employed to support a tough stance on the trade war, and reflects on their implications.","PeriodicalId":46455,"journal":{"name":"Text & Talk","volume":"0 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are netizens social Darwinists?: Recontextualization of Chinese survival discourse in online discussions about the US-China trade war\",\"authors\":\"Qing Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/text-2021-0039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Survival discourse has emerged as a prominent theme in online discussions about the US–China trade war on the Chinese social media platform Zhihu. This study undertakes a critical discourse analysis of this emergent discourse by examining 80 answers (totaling 95,753 words) from Zhihu users within the broader context of the invocation of survival discourses in modern Chinese history. An intertextual method was adopted in this study, which helps us to better understand netizens’ arguments in favor of the Chinese government’s tough stance on the trade war with the US and the probable success of this strategy. The analysis reveals the historicity and intertextuality of these discourses, identifies strategies which are employed to support a tough stance on the trade war, and reflects on their implications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Text & Talk\",\"volume\":\"0 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Text & Talk\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0039\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Text & Talk","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在中国社交媒体平台知乎上,关于中美贸易战的在线讨论中,生存话语已经成为一个突出的主题。本研究在中国近代史生存话语的大背景下,对知乎用户的80个回答(共95,753个单词)进行了批判性话语分析。本研究采用互文方法,这有助于我们更好地理解网民支持中国政府在与美国的贸易战中采取强硬立场的观点,以及这一战略可能取得成功的原因。分析揭示了这些话语的历史性和互文性,确定了用来支持对贸易战采取强硬立场的策略,并反思了它们的含义。
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
本刊更多论文
Are netizens social Darwinists?: Recontextualization of Chinese survival discourse in online discussions about the US-China trade war
Abstract Survival discourse has emerged as a prominent theme in online discussions about the US–China trade war on the Chinese social media platform Zhihu. This study undertakes a critical discourse analysis of this emergent discourse by examining 80 answers (totaling 95,753 words) from Zhihu users within the broader context of the invocation of survival discourses in modern Chinese history. An intertextual method was adopted in this study, which helps us to better understand netizens’ arguments in favor of the Chinese government’s tough stance on the trade war with the US and the probable success of this strategy. The analysis reveals the historicity and intertextuality of these discourses, identifies strategies which are employed to support a tough stance on the trade war, and reflects on their implications.
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
来源期刊
Text & Talk
Text & Talk Multiple-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Text & Talk (founded as TEXT in 1981) is an internationally recognized forum for interdisciplinary research in language, discourse, and communication studies, focusing, among other things, on the situational and historical nature of text/talk production; the cognitive and sociocultural processes of language practice/action; and participant-based structures of meaning negotiation and multimodal alignment. Text & Talk encourages critical debates on these and other relevant issues, spanning not only the theoretical and methodological dimensions of discourse but also their practical and socially relevant outcomes.
期刊最新文献
The effects of modal value and imperative mood on self-predicted compliance to health guidance: the case of COVID-19 “The results might not fully represent…”: Negation in the limitations sections of doctoral theses by Chinese and American students Recurrent gestures and embodied stance-taking in courtroom opening statements Turning talk into text: the representation of contemporary urban vernaculars in Swedish fiction Critical comments in the disciplines: a comparative look at peer review reports in applied linguistics and engineering
×
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