Studies In The Rhetorical Perspective On Critical Discourse Analysis

The rhetorical turn of western humanistic and social science in the 1980s triggered the critique of traditional scientism and a new conception of truth, reality and relations between subjectivity and objectivity. Compared with the critique triggered by the linguistic turn in philosophy and social science, the critique prompted by rhetorical turn is more systematic and overwhelming. The rhetorical turn attempts to explain how social subject within particular social space and constrained by particular networks of power relations, constructs social reality and acquires social cognition. The rise of CDA is, to a large extent, a positive response to this rhetorical turn. Through deconstructing discourse, the social practice that constitutes social structure, CDA endeavors to inquire into the hidden relationship between discourse and social cultural formation in order to expose inequality, ideology, bias and prejudice hidden in discourse. Founded on the premise that linguistic analysis could add an additional perspective to existing approaches to social critique, CDA enhances its academic status through socially engaged explanation.Though CDA is on its way to maturity, problems remain to be solved. Failure to provide a solution to these problems may in one way or another hinder its further development. Firstly, the rhetoric of critique is concomitant with the long history of academics. Though CDA has infused new connotations into the term"critical"to differentiate itself from other self-labeled critical approaches, there are persistent calls for CDA to be aware of its own linguistic orthodox and to transcend the established paradigm. Secondly, CDA assumes there is a dialectical relationship between discourse and social structure. However, its analysis often tends to be heavily influenced by critical theory of western Marxism, emphasizing the determining effect of social structure on discourse while failing to see discourse as action to bring positive outcomes. This overemphasis on deconstruction has to some extent undermined its intervening force in social reality. Thirdly, Conceptual Metaphor Theory has been applied in CDA and proved to have some explanatory adequacy, but the incompatibility of CMT with CDA has not received due attention.In view of the aforementioned reflections on CDA, we deem it necessary to infuse a rhetorical perspective into CDA to offset the criticism leveled against it and to build constructive dialogue between the two academic studies, since rhetoric is the recognized form of criticism that investigates ways of building discourse to achieve particular effect and its special interest lies in the discursive practice as the modus operandi of power. As a discipline devoted to the understanding, acquiring, developing and applying the power of words, rhetoric offers us penetrating insight into the working mechanism of power and ideology.The theoretical foundation of the present research rests on ideology as the conceptual link between communication and power so as to establish the inherent link between ideology and the social construction of meaning. On the one hand, we introduced Stuart Hall's theory of ideology as it recognizes a more dialectical relationship between discourse and social structure; On the other hand, informed by Steven Bygrave's illustration of the relationship between ideology and rhetoric, we associate Kenneth Burke's view of"language as symbolic action"with the concept of agency to transcend the deconstructive orientation of CDA. Our problematization of"rhetoric as epistemic"casts light on the power dimension of meaning construction. A deep insight into the relationship between rhetoric, power and ideology serves as the premise of the present research. Through a cursory view of sporadic reference to the self-effacement nature of rhetoric in classical and contemporary rhetoric, we define the rhetorical logic of power. On the basis of analyzing Thompson's internal modes of operation of ideology, we define rhetoric as carrier and demystifer of ideology. Through deconstructing the classical rhetorical concept of etho, the inherent link between classical rhetoric and CDA is established in our study.There is no denying that the critical turn of rhetoric contributes to the shared concern between the discipline of rhetoric and CDA. We thus probe into the implications of Kenneth Burke on CDA as his theory has triggered this critical turn. On the one hand, we demonstrate how CDA shares a similar view of language with Burke, highlighting Burke's deconstructing insight into the partiality of human symbolic act and its potential evil. On the other hand, we point out Burke's lifelong conviction?symbols possess the power of transforming and ameliorating social realities?has indicated the possibility of transcending the deconstructive orientation of CDA. His definition of man as the creator of the symbolic system which again creates man makes his rhetorical theory more expansive and fluid. His grammar of motives clearly unveils the underlying motive behind language use and thus offers a way to uncover how the dominant social groups mask and legitimate their power. His rhetoric of motives is a transcendence of the endless deconstruction. His"criticism of criticism"requires critical discourse analysts to be mindful of its own rhetoricality and to be engaged in constant self-reflection in order to keep the critical thrust of CDA.Burke's metaphorical view of language is closely related to his elaboration on metaphor and it accordingly becomes the starting point of our discussion of the role of metaphor in creating, maintaining and subverting power relations. We seek to demonstrate how metaphor research from a rhetorical perspective could offset the overemphasis on the experiential basis of metaphor and argue that to understand the ideological loading of metaphors it is necessary to have a deeper understanding of metaphor's significance to rhetorical invention, argument, evaluation and myth.After establishing the pertinence of Burke's rhetorical theory to our research, we apply the pentad and metaphor analysis to post 9/11 political discourse to disclose how the American new conservative ideology constructs its version of"reality"and how ideology as"terministic screen"orients us toward a particular understanding of reality. To fight against ideology, which is"a reduction of reality", we have to resort to alternative"terministic screen"and"alternative metaphor"to be incessantly engaged in rhetorical intervention to bring about possible change to social reality.The present research adopts a qualitative, interpretative critical methodology. By drawing on the intellectual wisdom of classical rhetoric, American New Rhetoric, communication theory and cultural studies, it makes a tentative exploration on how a rhetorical perspective might complement CDA.