对中美红酒背标酒品介绍差异的批评性话语分析

对中美红酒背标酒品介绍差异的批评性话语分析 学校代码:10036 捌矽手芗爹f节贸易声学 of andEconomics InternationalBusiness University 硕士学位论文 对中美红酒背标酒品介绍差异的批评性话语 分析 培养单位:英语学院 专业名称:外语语言学及应用语言学 研究方向:商务英语语言研究 作 者: 季翔 指导教师: 丁崇文 论文日期:二。一一年五月 f fI[1lllflI JlIIlllIllImr lfl0 Y1 MAThesis WineIntroductionon A of ComparativeStudy RedWine-- BackLabelsofChina’SandAmerican Discourse from ofCritical Perspective Analysis By Ji Xiang Advisor:Prof(DingChongwen SchoolofInternationalStudies ofInternationalBusinessandEconomics University 2011 May 学位论文原创性声明 本人郑重声明:所呈交的学位论文，是本人在导师的指导下， 独立进行研究工作所取得的成果。除文中已经注明引用的内容外， 本论文不含任何其他个人或集体已经发或撰写过的作品成果。 对本文所涉及的研究工作做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文 中以明确方式标明。本人完全意识到本声明的法律责任由本人承 担。 特此声明 学位做作者躲狰2呲年5月28日 学位论文版权使用授权书 本人完全了解对外经济贸易大学关于收集、保存、使用学位 论文的规定，同意如下各项内容:按照学校要求提交学位论文的 印刷本和电子版本;学校有权保存学位论文的印刷本和电子版， 并采用影印、缩印、扫描、数字化或其它手段保存论文;学校有 权提供目录检索以及提供本学位论文全文或部分的阅览服务;学 校有权按照有关规定向国家有关部门或者机构送交论文;在以不 以赢利为目的的前提下，学校可以适当复制论文的部分或全部内 容用于学术活动。保密的学位论文在解密后遵守此规定。 日 学位论文作者签名: 毒孤 2011年5月28 日 导师签孝:, 琴Z矽z二 2011年5月28 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS the ofthis wishto heartfeltthanksto Firstly,atcompletionthesis，1 expressmy my melotsof the of supervisor,ProfessorDingChongwen,who gave helpduringprocess thisthesis(She effort no mevaluableadviees writing spared giving withoutwhichthis thesiswouldbe to impossiblecomplete( am to fi'iendsHao andZhu Also，Ideeply me obligedmy Peng Yue,who helped collecttheAmerican redwineback1abelinthe inthe USA(Withouttheir supermarkets sincereand thesiswould precioushelp，the havebeenunableto proceed( Lastbutnot the wouldliketo thanksto roommateDi least,1 expressmy my Wang and Xiwho melotsof the also Wang gave inspirationduringdiscussion(ney meto onwhenIfeltblueandfrustrated( encouragedcarry Thefaultsand infelicitiesinthisthesisremainown( my JiXiang 2011 May 摘要 随着中国经济的发展和居民生活水平的提高，红酒这个代表高生活品质的物 品也进入了百姓日常生活中。在各地的超市中，都开出了专门的红酒区，向人们 提供国内外品牌的红酒。经笔者发现，中外红酒背标中的酒品介绍部分不尽相同， 差异尽显，反映出不同国家之间的社会文化差异。透过红酒背标中酒品介绍部分 分析，将有助于更加深入了解不同国家的社会文化，同时将对今后葡萄酒的出口 起到积极意义。据国际葡萄与葡萄酒局2010年调查显示，美国是世界红酒消费 额最大的国家，并且具有最大的消费潜力。了解美国红酒背标酒品介绍特点 和美 国社会文化特点将有助于了解美国消费者的特点，对中国葡萄酒品牌日后成功打 入美国市场和创作针对美国消费者的红酒背标提供可能的建议。 本文所选取的语料来自中国和美国大型超市红酒区的红酒背标，因此所选话 语能较好地反映大众消费的红酒品牌，因而能更准确地反映该国的社会文化和大 众的消费心理。 本文运用批评性话语分析理论进行研究，且利用Fairclough的三项度模型 为分析框架，分别从文本、话语和社会文化层面分析语料的主选择、语义关系 和社会文化差别。通过分析得出以下结论: 在文本层面，中美红酒酒品介绍在主题选择上差异明显，美国酒品介绍主要 涉及酒庄 气候、历史 、手工酿制技术、口感、具体搭配食品、该红酒官方网 站和以及在介绍最后直接的消费邀请等。中国酒品介绍主要涉及红酒的 机械酿制技术、口感、营养要素已经馈赠亲友作用等。在话语实践层面，英语使 用了更多的对比、递进以及转折等语义关系词;在社会实践层面，美国更接近于 Hall和Hofstede提出的低语境、低权利距离、个人主义、低不确定性规避;中 国更接近于Hall和Hofstede提出的高语境、高权利距离、集体主义、高不确定 性规避。 本文最后根据所得结论给中国红酒生产商提出可能的建议，在对美国出 口 时，尽量针对美国消费者和社会文化特征，向美国本土的酒品介绍靠拢，减 少对 美国消费者的文化冲击，以提高红酒出口额和出口利润。 关键词:红酒背标、酒品介绍、社会文化、批判性话语分析 andcontactnumberanddirectinvitationfor food,website vinification,flavor,paired focus Chinesewineinffoductiononthetechnology consumption(Whereas nutrientsand to and vinification,flavor,healthyfunction presentfamilyfriends (On thediscursive USesmoresemanticrelationwordsthanChinese(Onthe level，English social cultureis level，Chinese distance,collectivism，highuncertainty high-power cultureis avoidanceoriented(American low-power avoidanceoriented( uncertainty Attheendofthe author Chineseredwine that thesis，thesuggests producers when wineto American andsocial red America,the text，discursive exporting specific the introductionseelTlmore”native” featuresshouldbe tomakewine considered，thus wine toAmericanconsumerstoboostthe and ofChinesered exportationprofit industry( Words:red Discourse Key wine，backlabel，wineintroduction,culture，Critical Analysis CONTENTS OneINTRODUCTION„„„„„„„(((„„„„„„„((„„„„„„„„((1 Chapter 1(1Needforthe Study(„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((I 1(2 ofthe SignificanceStudy(„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(2 1(3Research Questions„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((2 1(4S缸ucnlreoftheThesis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„3 TwoLITERATUREREVIEVl『-„„„„„„„„(„„„„„„(„(„„(„„zI Chapter 2(1CriticalDiscourse Analysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((4 2(1(1NotionsofCD?,„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((4 ofCDA„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(5 2(1(2FiveCommonFeatures 2(1(3 and ofCDA„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„7 HistoryDevelopment Model„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((9 2(1(4 Three-Dimcnsional Fairclough’S 2(2CulturalIssues„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(10 CulturalDimensions„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(„„„„„„„(10 2(2(1Hofstede’S 2(2(2Hall’s andLow-ContextOrientation„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„12 High-Context 2(3Red1Vv7ineLabel„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„14 2(3(1IntroductionofredwilleIabel„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„14 Label„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((17 2(3(2the ofRedWine History winelabel„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((17 2(3(3the ofred Importance 9 ThreeMETHoDoLOGY„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„1 Chapter 9 3(1ResearchFramework„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„1 3(1(1 TextAnalysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„。20 3(1(2Discursive Analysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(22 3(1(3SoCial Analysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„。22 3(2DataCollection„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(2zl 3(2(1the ofdatacollection„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„25 range theProcessionofDataCollection„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„26 3(2(2 FourDA:T-AANALYSISANDDISCUSSl0N„„„„„„„„„„„(27 Chapter 4(1(Text Analysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(27 4(1(1LexicalChoice„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„27 4(1(2 Modality(„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„39 4(2 Discursive Analysis„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((40 4(3 Social Analysis(„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„42 4(3(1Hofstede’SCllltural Dimensions„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(42 4(3(2Hall’s andLow High Context„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(48 FiveCONCLUSIONS„„„„„„„„„„„„(„„„„„((„„„„„„52 Chapter 5(1 and FindingsImplications„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(52 5(2 Future LimitationsE 丘(ort„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„54 REFERENCES„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„56 ListofTables Table2(1:Differencesbetween andLow-ContextCultures„„„„„。14 High-Context 3(1:Mood Table 1:Subject+Finite„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((21 Table3(2:SemanticRelations„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(22 3(3:DataCollection„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„。25 Table Table4(1:ThemeSelection„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„28 Table 4(2:Modality(„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„40 Relations„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„41 Table4(3:Semantic Listof Figures ― Dimension((„„„„(„(„(„„((10 Discourseas andContext Figure2(1 Text，Interaction 3 Cultures the andLow-Context„„„„„„(1 Figure2(2 ArrangedAlongHigh-Context AmericanFrontLabel„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„(16 Figure2(3 7 AmericanBackLabel„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„„((1 Figure2(4 as andContextDimension„„„„„„„„„„(20 Discourse Figure3(1 Text，Interaction One Chapter INTRODUCTION 1(1Needforthe Study 、聃m the of andChina's globalization economy,red rapiddevelopment wine--whicha life Chinese representshigh-standardquality,isgraduallyacceptedby consumers(Thereare10tsofredwinefrombothChinaandabroadavailableforChinese inthe introductiononthebacklabelisa consumers veryimportant supermarkets(ne consumersto for the ofawinebrand(111eauthorwas CUl'iOBS way gainknowledge very to the of wineintheirbacklabelsand analyze f(orei弘red interestingly, descriptions the of redwinearedifferentfromthatofChinese foundoutthat foreign descriptions fromtheculturalandsocial winenot butalso only胁thelanguageperspective aremore tomakearesearch011(nle ofthe perspectives，whichmeaningful study differencesbetweenwine fromChinaandothercountriestorevealthe description helps characteristicsofeach wine attitudestowardredwineandeach country'sculture，social wine culture( country'sconsumption Chinahas redwinebrandswhich their toother ofthe many exportproduct parts worldwith faster isthe for increasinglyspeedeveryyear(Americalargesttargetcountry Chineseredwine anditisalso redwine the consumptioncountry exportation largest 44 as andMarket whichwillsee billiondollar's Research consumptionexpectedby andmost MarketResearch World’Slargest respected resource (Bymaking ofChineseandAmericanred wouldknowthecharacteristicsof comparisons wine，we countriesredwine andtheculturalandsocialfeaturesreflected丘om both description features backlabels(Withabetter ofthe andsocial the understandinglinguistic，cultural red would Chineseredwinemakerssome for ofAmerican wine，we provide tips forlater wouldmakeChinesered winemore adjustmentexport，which easilyaccepted 1 consumersandthusboosttheoverall ofChinesewine American and by profit industry wine inthe the oftheChinese industry market，嬲well( improveimage global 1(2 ofthe Study Significance TlliSthesiswhichmakesresearchonthewineintroductiononthebacklabelofthe redwinebottleis the significantby followingperspectives: thatit tomakeresearchonredwine writerobservesis Firstly,the veryinteresting andtheresearchofthebacklabelis betweenthe comparativelyrare(Throughreading back couldmakea onbothChineseandAmericanred linesofthe label，we comparison winefeatureson andcultural Americiummake linguistic perspectives--how textinfluencedtheir culturalandsocialfeatures(Thisthesisis promotional by specific makerstomakethebacklabelof to some forChineseredwine expectedprovideinsight meirredwinemore forAmericanconsumer$(Thewriter that easilyacceptable hopes coulddoitsshareto theoverallconditionofChineseredwine thisresearch improve industry( researchonredwineinChinaandabroad focused Sccondly，the mostly previous onthe to theflavorand ofred the technologies wine(However,勰 to improve quality Americanand researchon fewresearchweredoneonthe of labels，very comparison Chinesewineintroductiononthebacklabelonthe ofboth and perspectivelinguistic cultural perspectives( thesisinitiatestheresearch011redwineintroductionCritical Thirdly,this by Discourse is usedto issues( usually analyzepolitical Analysis CDA which datausedinthisthesisis isto is Fourthly,the bilingual， whichsay,thecomparison two and wasnotconductedmuch donebetween Chinese，which by languages-??English others( 1(3Research Questions Thisthesistriesto two explorequestions( ofAmerican Whatdifferencesdothewineintroductionsonthebacklabels Chinesered and winebottlesreflect? This redwine thesistriesto thecharacteristicsofChineseandAmerican categorize 2 Candculture(Then makea betweenthetwo(Winlacareful ofbothChineseand comparison analysis Americanredwine thesisisto some introductions，the to providepracticalsuggestions Chinesewine inordertomaketheir more companies productseasilyacceptedby consumers( foreign Withthe differencesofCllinesewineintroductiOIlSandtheAmericallwine wouldbeeasierforChineseredwinemakerstoknowwhat introductions，it could they d0tomaketheirbacklabelsmore Americancollsllnler$( easilyacceptedby 1(4StructureoftheThesis 1 coversthe needand ofthe research and Chapter significancestudy,thequestions thestructureofthethesis(ThisiSanintroductionofthethesis( 2istheliterature Chapter reviewofthemaintheodesusedinthisthesis(The CriticalDiscourse DimensionHofstedeand Analysis，Cultural the by Hi。gh― Context，and Low-ContextOrientationHallwouldbe by presented( 3isthe ofthethesis thedata Chapter methodologypart including analytical three-dimensionalmodel(The data tools―Fairclough’S importantanalytical wouldalsolistedin method--corpus be this analysis part( 4isthe ofthe isthe ofthe Chapter analysisprocess thesis，whichapplication theories mentionedtothe research questions( 5Sel VeSastheconclusion liststheconclusionsoftheresearch Chapter part，which and study( 3 Two Chapter REVlEW LITERATURE 2(1CriticalDiscourse Analysis CDA 2(1(1NotionsofCDA discourse abbreviatedto an in Critical analysis often CDA isimportantapproach thefieldofdiscoursewhich theoriesandmethodsforthe analysisprovides empirical oftherelationsbetweendiscourseandsocialandcultural in study developments differentsocialdomains(Itistext orientedand innature( analysis multidisciplinary and 2002 LouisePhillipsMarianne彤Gorgensen TherootsofCDAlieinclassical and Rhetoric，Text―linguistics and and Applied Pragmatics( Linguistics to statementsaboutthetheoretical isdifficultmakeconsistent However,it foundationofCDA(Thereisnosuch formation uniform,commontheory thing弱a CDA(In areseveral cametothe determiningfact,there approaches(MichaelMeyer conclusionthat"thereisno theoretical thatisused guiding viewpoint consistently thearea within dotheCDA from of CDA，nor protagonistsproceedconsistently theory tothefieldofdiscourseandthenbacktotheory'’ Meryer2001 ( Onthe theoreticalframeworkofCDAseemseclecticand whole，the unsystematic( But beviewed嬲a of and thisCanalso phenomenon(Thepluralitytheory positive Canbe of whichthisresearch CDA，to methodologyhighlighted勰aspecificstrength OWesits and 999:1 discipline dynamics( Wodak2002 ChouliarakiFairclough 16 as describcdfollows: as WeseeCDA a theoriesinto varietyof bringing that socialtheoriesontheonehandand theoriesontheother,SO linguistic other its isa the what豇 itself theoryshiftingsynthesisof theories,though andthe is themediationbetweenthesocial theories加particular 4 linguistic-the"order ofdiscourse",thesocial semiotic structuringof theoretical construction hybridity(The discoursewhichCDAtriesto of cancome various operationalisepom disciplines,and编econceptof j'operationalisation。entailsina wherethe working trans-disciplinaryway one logicof discipline for be towork“inthe example(sociology cant'put developmentoyanother for example,linguistics ( 2(1(2Five Common of FeaturesCDA thedifferent to Among commonfeaturescan approachesCDA，five beidentified( Itisthesethatmakeit to the as tothe possiblecategorize same approachesbelonging movement(In the accountwe drawon andWodak’S following Fairclough overview( 2(1??2??1TheCharacterof SocialandCultural in ProcessesandStructures Partly Linguistic??Discursive Discursive which textsare practices―through consmned produced created and and received viewedasan form interpreted 一are ofsocial which important practice contributestotheconstitution ofthesocialworld socialidentities including andsocial relations(Itis discursive in partlythrough oftext practiceseverydaylife processes and social production andcultural consumption that and take reproduction change followsthatsomesocietal arenotof place(It phenomena a character( Theaimofcritical discourseistoshed onthe analysis light dimensionofsocial andcultural and of inlate phenomenaprocesses change modernity( Research incriticaldiscoursehascoveredareassuchas analysis organizationalanalysis andClair1 1 e(g(Mumby communication 997 ，pedagogy Chouliaraki and 998 ，mass and 1 racism，nationalism 199 identity e(g(Chouliaraki eta1( 999;VanDijk 1;Wodak 1 communicationand 999 ，mass 1 ofmarket economy Richardson 998 ，thespread andmass practices communication1 and Fairclough 993 ，democracy politics 1995a,1 Fairclough995b，2000 ( Discourse not written encompassesonly and butalsovisual spoken language is thatthe of texts visual images(Itcommonlyaccepted analysis containingimages musttake accountofthe characteristicsof visualsemiotics special andthe relationship 5 between and criticaldiscourse in languageimages(However,withinanalysis as discourse in isa to labelsasif were analysisgeneral theretendencyanalyze tlley text( linguistic 2(1(2(2DiscourseisBothConstitutiveand Constituted Forcritical discourse isaformofsocial which analysis，discourse practiceboth constitutesthesocialworldandisconstitutedothersocial social by practices(As isinadialectical withothersocialdimensions(Itdose practice，discourse relationship not to contributethe and ofsocialstructuresbutalsoreflects just shapingreshaping them(When howdiscursiveinthemediatake inthe Faircloughanalyses practices part new of formof alsotakeintoaccountthatdiscursive are shaping politics，he practices influencedsocietalforcesthatdonothavea discursivecharacter( by solely tothe asan ofhow Fairclough family thesocialstructure points example influencesdiscursive between andchildrenis practices(Therelationshipparents partly constituted，he thesame isaninstitutionwith discursively says，but,at time，thefamily concrete andidentities(These practices，pre-existingrelationships practices， andidentitieswere havebecome constituted，but relationships originallydiscursively sedimentedininstitutions andnon-discursive constitutiveeffectsof practices(The discoursework wimother suchasthedistributionofhouseholdtasks( together practices structuresan role in and Furthermore，social independent play forming discursiveinthe practicesfamily: "Thediscursiveconstitutiondoesnot ofsocietyemanatefromafreeplayof headsbut asocial which ideas伽people'sfrom practiceis(arm&rooted加 andorientedto social real,material structures( Fairclough1992b:66 2(1(2(3 Useshould Language be withinitsSocialContext EmpiricallyAnalyzed Criticaldiscourse in textual of analysisengagesconcrete，linguisticanalysis useinsocialinteraction(ThisitfrombothLaelauandMouffe’S language distinguishes discoursewhichdoesnot out studiesof theory cRrrysystematic，empiricallanguageuse， andfromdiscursive whichcarriesoutrhetoricalbutnot studiesof psychology linguistic use( language 6 2(1(2(4DiscourseFunctions Ideologically Indiscourse isclaimedthatdiscursive contributetothe analysis，it practices creationand of relations reproductionunequalpower betweensocial groups(((-for social and minoritiesandthe example,betweenclasses，womf既lmen,e??lic majority( TheseeffectsRaRe understoodas definescriticaldiscourse ideologicaleffects(Fairclough as an whichseeksto analysisapproach investigatesystematically and determinationbetweena ’'oftenopaquerelationshipsofcausality discursive andtextsandbroader practices,events socialandcultural and such structures,relations andtexts processes(((How practices,events ariseout are relations and ofandideologicallyshapedby ofpowerstruggles over the these betweendiscourseand power(((Howopacityof relationship iS and 1993: societyitselfafactorsecuringpower hegemony“( Fairclough 135 Critical discourseis’critical’inthesensethatitaimstorevealtheroleof analysis discursiveinthemaintenanceofthesocial thosesocial practice world，including relationsthatinvolve relationsof aim unequal istocontributetosocial power(Its changethelinesofmore relationsincommunicationand along equalpower processes in society general( 2(1(2(5CriticalResearch Criticaldiscourse does itselfas analysisnot,therefore，understand politically socialscience asacritical whichis neutral asobjectivist does ，but approachpolitically committedtosocial thenameof discourse change(In emancipation， criticalanalytical takethesideof social aims approaches oppressed touncovertherole groups(Critique ofdiscursiveinthemaintenance of theoverall practice relations，wi?l unequalpower of theresultsofcritical goalharnessing discoursetothe forradical analysisstruggle social interest change(Fairclough’Sin’explanatory critique’and’criticallanguage which wewill directedtowardsthe awareness’，to retum,is achievementofthis goal( 2(1(3 and ofCDA HistoryDevelopment In 1 the Wasahotdebateinthewestern in 960s，there German world，especially theinfluenceofbehaviorismand social countries，on speaking positivism(Many 7 scientistsbelieve overstatesthe ofscienceandthatits positivism objectiveness interestis connectionwithman's neglected( In 1 the the ofwestern 970s，withspread communication勰wellas circles to close sociological，mass psychologicalbegan give and and attentiontothe between culture(Underthissocial relationshipideologysociety researchteaminthe of startedtheir context,a UniversityGlasgow,Scotland news”on issuedtheirresearch into”bad TV,and results(Theseresults investigation tumedouttobe intheinterestsofthe and after working governmentcapitalists(Soon their ofModemCultureStudiesin alsomade research，Center BirminghamUniversity critical ofnews oftlleirstudiesmentionedabovecouldbe analysis reports(Both comidered勰theofcritical embryo linguistic( mostinfluentialthinkerin from1970to1 Habermas，觞the 980， Jorgen Germany atheoretict臣 ameworkforcriticalsocialscience(Headvocatesthat proposes people shouldbeawareofhowan reflectsand andfacts(French ideology misrepresentsreality Pecheuxout anddiscourse socialsciences philosopher analyst points produceideology ofsocial ratherthan science sciencebeseen system objectiveknowledge(Socialmight asextensionof related his isnota politicalpractice ideology(Ineyes，language tool，but an function( communication-exchangeperformsideological AnotherFrench and Lacancontendsthatinthe philosopherpsychologistJaques structureof the ofthe Saussurerole is signifier-signified by signifier languageproposed dominantOVerthe isactualizedthe Can signified，which by signifier(Languagesay otherthanwhatis something says( Thelater critical were influencedviewsofthese emerginglinguisticsdeeply by scholarsofsocialsciencesmentionedabove( Fowlerinitiatesthetrendincritical studies(Theterm” Critical Roger linguistic then Fowlerandhisassociatesinmeirbook Linguistics”Was developedby Language in for andControlin1979(AndFowler'slater a the book，hegivesgoodexplanation ofcritical emerging linguistics: isthatis ?The