更新时间：11-04 （白鲸）提供原创文章
ABSTRACT
As the soul and leader of mass media, editorials play a key role in guiding the public opinion. In editorials, argument from authority is one of the most common strategies used by news commentator. At present, most researches on editorials are studied from the perspective of news communication and linguistics, ignoring the connection between the two aspects and the argumentative characteristic of editorials. Given this, based on Pragma-Dialectics, this paper analyzes, identifies, and evaluates the argument from authority in the editorials of China Daily.
Research results find that argument from expert opinion, research institution, and investigation are three primary kinds of appeal to authority in editorials of China Daily. To persuade more readers to accept the standpoint of China Daily, the editors adopt some wrong argument schemes which violate the rules for critical discussion.
Key Words: China Daily; Editorials; Pragma-Dialectics; Argument from Authority; Argument Scheme
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
摘要
Chapter One INTRODUCTION-1
1.1 Research Background-1
1.2 Aim and Significance-2
1.3 Organization of the Thesis-2
Chapter Two LITERATURE REVIEW-4
2.1 Studies on Editorials-4
2.2 Studies on Argument from Authority-5
2.3 Summary-6
Chapter Three RESEARCH DESIGN-8
3.1 Theoretical Assumptions-8
3.1.1 Editorials as Argumentative Discourse-8
3.1.2 Argumentation as a Part of Critical Discussion-9
3.1.3 Ideal Model of a Critical Discussion-10
3.1.4 Rules for a Critical Discussion-11
3.2 Research Questions-11
3.3 Data Collections-12
3.4 Research Methods-12
Chapter Four RESULTS AND DISCUSSION-13
4.1 Argument from Expert Opinion-13
4.1.1 Reconstruction and Analysis of Argument from Expert Opinion-13
4.1.2 Evaluation of Argument from Expert Opinion-15
4.2 Argument from Research Institution-17
4.2.1 Reconstruction and Analysis of Argument from Research Institution-17
4.2.2 Evaluation of Argument from Research Institution-20
4.3 Argument from Investigation-22
4.3.1 Reconstruction and Analysis of Argument from Investigation-22
4.3.2 Evaluation of Argument from Investigation-22
4.4 Violations of the Ten Rules in the Editorials of China Daily-23
4.4.1 Violation of the Freedom Rule-23
4.4.2 Violation of the Starting Point Rule-24
4.4.3 Violation of the Argument Scheme Rule-25
Chapter Five CONCLUSIONS-26
5.1 Major Findings-26
5.2 Implications-26
5.3 Limitations-27
5.4 Future Research-27
REFERENCES-28