论文部分内容阅读
食品安全风险交流关注度高、专业性强、各方利益诉求驳杂,有其特殊的语境,在这个语境中“说话”必须选择适切的语体才能有助于达成有效防控风险的效果。方舟子、崔永元围绕转基因问题展开的食品安全风险交流在身份定位、说服论证、话轮交替、语用风格诸方面采取的修辞策略迥异。作为一名科普者,方舟子在逻辑推理的科学性和语言表达的条理性方面表现优异,却没有在民调中赢得支持,修辞层面的原因在于没有充分认识语体与语境适配的重要性,其失误源于以下三个方面的误判:1、把交流对象预设成科学圈内人而非公众;2、把交流目的变成压倒辩手而非与公众沟通;3、把交流等同于推理论证而忽视了德性、善意,以及对公众情绪的感知。
In the context of food safety risk communication, which is highly concerned and highly specialized, the interests of all parties are complicated and has its own special context. In this context, “speaking ” must select the appropriate style of language to help achieve effective prevention and control The effect of risk. Fang Zhouzi and Cui Yongyuan The exchange of food safety risks around genetically modified issues takes a very different rhetorical strategy in terms of identity, persuasion, turn-taking, and pragmatic style. As a popular science populace, Fang did well in scientific reasoning of logic reasoning and formality of language expression, but did not win the support in the poll. The rhetorical reason lies in the fact that he did not fully understand the importance of adaptation of the genre Its mistakes stem from the following three aspects of miscarriage of justice: 1, the object of communication is presumed to be a science insiders rather than the public; 2, the purpose of communication into an overriding counsel instead of communicating with the public; 3, the exchange Equivalent to reasoning and neglect of virtue, goodwill, as well as the perception of public emotions.