A Study On The Pragmatic Paradigm Of Response Discourse And Its Pragmatic Value Of Foreign Ministry Spokespersons

As an important part of political discourse,diplomatic discourse is a powerful weapon for dealing with problems,resolving conflicts and resolving crises.It can not be ignored in the study of political discourse.As an important carrier of foreign communication,language plays an irreplaceable role in achieving diplomatic intentions and achieving diplomatic success.The theory of linguistic world outlook holds that there exists a specific paradigm of political discourse in a particular political community.Based on the description of the linguistic facts of the Foreign Ministry spokesperson’s response discourse,this paper studies and draws on the relevant research results of linguistics,adopts the pragmatic paradigm theory of Russian linguist In terms of specific research methods,this paper explores the spokesperson’s pragmatic paradigm and its pragmatic value by combining the relevant theories of linguistics,using the methods of literature research,comparative analysis,discourse analysis and comprehensive application of the research methods of related disciplines.It has certain theoretical exploration value and practical guiding significance.Generally speaking,this paper can be summarized into three parts,namely the introduction,the main part and the conclusion part.The introduction part(Chapter 1)first states the basis of topic selection and points out the value of this study.Then it defines the scope of the study,explains the source of the corpus and the research methods.Finally,this paper summarizes the current research situation and finds that previous studies are inadequate,and then leads to this paper.The main part(Chapter 2 to Chapter 5)mainly explores the pragmatic paradigm and its pragmatic value of the spokesman’s response discourse of the Ministry ofForeign Affairs from five aspects: formal paradigm,strategic paradigm,non-paradigm response and pragmatic value.The second chapter explores the formal paradigm of the spokesperson’s response discourse.Mainly from the differentiation of "I" in the response and the analysis of "He" in the response.The differentiation of "I" in response can be divided into two levels: the "I" as the subject of sentence and the "I" as the subject of speech.As the main body of a sentence,"I" mainly has four paradigms: "I","We","Chinese" and "We".As the main body of speech,"I" can be realized mainly by using the act sentence and the expression sentence.From the perspective of "analysis" of "he" in the response,it can be divided into two lines: the vocabulary referring to the other side and the expression of the other side.Chapter three explores the strategic paradigm of spokesperson’s response discourse.At the level of strategy paradigm,this paper combs and summarizes the spokesperson’s response paradigm from two aspects: the amount of information provided and the way of question-and-answer,and draws four types of answer strategies: direct informing,direct avoiding,indirect informing and indirect avoiding.In the specific process of answering journalists’ questions,specific strategies are also different.A strategy can respond to a variety of content and questions,and a response can also contain a variety of strategy paradigms.Therefore,the use of strategies is not fixed,but to respond to and adjust with the specific questions.Chapter four explores the speaker’s non-paradigm response.At the level of non-paradigm response,this paper summarizes five situations of non-paradigm response,namely,unmarked neglect of avoidance class,real class questions,non-answering class questions,code mixing of informing class and triggered informing class.The fifth chapter explores the pragmatic value of the speaker’s response discourse.The pragmatic value of Foreign Ministry spokesperson’s response discourse is mainly discussed from the perspectives of instrumental category and cultural category.From the perspective of tools,explicit pragmatic value(communication)is mainly embodied in safeguarding national interests and avoiding direct conflicts,while implicit pragmatic value(thinking)is mainly embodied in reducing communication costs and expressing euphemism and implicature.From the cultural perspective,the dominant pragmatic value is mainly embodied in reality and dissemination,while the implicit pragmatic value is mainly embodied in theconstruction of identity and the control of on-site emotions.Among them,the construction of identity is subdivided into identity construction with the international community,identity construction with journalists asking questions,and identity construction with opposing camps.In terms of controlling emotions,it can be divided into two categories: strengthening emotions on the spot and concealing emotions on the spot.The concluding part(Chapter 6)summarizes the viewpoints of the article and points out the limitations and shortcomings of the study.