中美法庭论辩诉求策略的对比修辞研究  

A Contrastive Rhetoric Study of Appealing Strategies in American and Chinese Court Argumentation

作　　者：何静秋[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东医学院

出　　处：《广西民族大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2012年第5期168-172,共5页JOURNAL OF GUANGXI MINZU UNIVERSITY:PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE EDITION

基　　金：广东医学院2010年科研基金资助项目(项目编号:XQ1141)

摘　　要：在亚里士多德修辞三诉诸的理论框架下,从逻辑诉求、伦理诉求和情感诉求三方面对中国和美国的法庭论辩所运用的诉求策略进行对比研究的结果表明:中国律师较比美国律师更加注重理性诉求的运用,而美国律师对伦理诉求和情感诉求的运用更加充分,特别在伦理诉求方面具有明显的优势。不同的法庭修辞情境和修辞受众是造成这种差异的主要原因。这一研究发现为跨文化法律语言研究提供了新的视角,也丰富了英汉对比修辞的研究成果。Within the theoretical framework of Aristotlds rhetorical triangle, a com- parative study of the appealing strategies in the three aspects of logos, ethos and pathos in American and Chinese court argumentation shows that Chinese lawyers pay more alten- tion to rational appeals than American lawyers while American lawyers employ ethical and emotional appeals to a greater extent, especially in ethical appeals. Different rhetorical situations and rhetorical audiences in court are the main causes for such disparity. This study provides a new insight into eross-cultural researches of legal language and may also enrich English-Chinese contrastive rhetoric studies.

关 键 词：法庭论辩 中美对比 诉求 修辞情境 受众 

分 类 号：H051[语言文字—语言学]