| 6,519 | 224 | 14 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
视觉论证理论的兴起,确认了图像具有和文字同等重要的修辞功能。在语言和图像构成的图文关系中,视觉修辞分析的关键是揭示语图之间的论证结构及其修辞实践。语言和图形分别对应于不同的心理认知机制,双重编码理论(DCT)有助于相对清晰地把握认识过程的信息加工机制。可以从哲学逻辑和语图关系两个维度来把握视觉修辞的"语图论"。哲学逻辑上,西方哲学思潮的演变,体现为语言和图像的哲学关系思辨:从柏拉图到利奥塔,图像与感觉主义立场逐渐从语言所设定的"牢笼"中挣脱出来。语图关系上,语言和图像的论证结构主要体现为两种基本的互文叙事,分别是统摄叙事与对话叙事。统摄叙事指向语言主导下的释义结构,这是古典主义叙事的基本风格;对话叙事则体现为语言和图像之间的对话主义关系,其文化后果往往是现代主义的或后现代主义的。
Abstract：The emerging of visual argumentation theory confirms that the visual have rhetorical function that is equally important as the rhetorical function of the verbal. Regarding the verbal-visual relation, the key of visual rhetoric analysis is revealing the argumentation method and the rhetorical practice between the visual and the verbal. In terms of psychological mechanism, the verbal and the visual correspond to different psychological mechanisms. The dual coding theory(DCT) is helpful for learning about the information processing mechanism within the process of cognition. In terms of philosophical logic,the evolvement of(western philosophical thinking) Philosophy ideological trend is embodied in the intellectual enquiry into the philosophical relation between the visual and the verbal. From Plato to Jean-Francois Lyotard, the visuals and the position of sensationalism had gradually broken out the"cage"of the verbal. From the perspective of verbal-visual relation, the argument structure of the visual and the verbal lies in two kinds of intertextuality: verbal-visual consistence and verbal-visual dialogue. The former stresses the monologue narratives led by the verbal, which corresponds to the classical narrative genre; the latter is represented by the dialogism between the verbal and the visual, the cultural consequence of which is usually either modernistic or post-modernistic.
[1]C.Gauker.Words and Images:An Essay on the Origin of Ideas.Oxford:Oxford University Press,2011:145-162;163-183;145.
[2]J.P.Dillard,E.Peck.Affect and Persuasion Emotional Responses to Public Service Announcements.Communication Research,2000,27(4):461-495;462.
[3]E.H.Gombrich.The Image and the Eye:Further Studies in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation.Oxford:Phaidon Press,1982:150.
[4]R.L.Gregory.How Do We Interpret Images?//C.Blakemore,H.B.Barlow,M.Weston-Smith(Eds.).Images and Understanding:Thoughts about Images,Ideas about Understanding.Cambridge,UK:Cambridge University Press,1990:310-330.
[5]C.Blakemore.Understanding Images in the Brain//C.Blakemore,H.B.Barlow,M.Weston-Smith(Eds.).Images and Understanding:Thoughts about Images,Ideas about Understanding.Cambridge,UK:Cambridge University Press,1990:257-283.
[6]刘涛.文化意象的构造与生产——视觉修辞的心理学运作机制探析.现代传播—中国传媒大学学报,2011,9:20-25.
[7]J.E.Grunig.Image and Substance:From Symbolic to Behavioral Relationships.Public Relations Review,1993,19(2):121-139.
[8]H.B.Barlow.What Does the Brain See?How Does It Understand?//C.Blakemore,H.B.Barlow,M.Weston-Smith(Eds.).Images and Understanding:Thoughts about Images,Ideas about Understanding.Cambridge,UK:Cambridge University Press,1990:5.
[9]A.Paivio.Dual Coding Theory:Retrospect and Current Status.Canadian Journal of Psychology Revue Canadienne De Psychologie,1991,45(3):255.
[10]A.G.Gross.Toward a Theory of Verbal-visual Interaction:The Example of Lavoisier.Rhetoric Society Quarterly,2009,39(2):147-169.
[11]M.Iversen.Vicissitudes of the Visual Sign.Word&Image,2012,6(3):212-216.
[12]刘涛.元框架:话语实践中的修辞发明与争议宣认.新闻大学,2017,2:1-15.
[13]亚里士多德.修辞学.罗念生译.上海:上海人民出版社,2005:49.
[14]G.J.Chryslee,S.K.Foss,A.L.Ranney.The Construction of Claims in Visual Argumentation.Visual Communication Quarterly,1996,3(2):9-13.
[15]D.S.Birdsell,L.Groarke.Toward a Theory of Visual Argument.Argumentation and Advocacy,1996,33(1):1-10.
[16]鲁道夫·阿恩海姆.艺术与视知觉.滕守尧,朱疆源译.成都:四川人民出版社,2001:54.
[17]K.Kenney.Building Visual Communication Theory by Borrowing from Rhetoric.Journal of Visual Literacy,2002,22(1):59.
[18]D.Fleming.Can Pictures Be Arguments?.Argumentation and Advocacy,1996,33(1):11-22.
[19]柏拉图.理想国.郭斌和,张竹明译.北京:商务印书馆,1986:390.
[20]安东尼·卡斯卡蒂.柏拉图之后的文本与图像.学术月刊,2007,2:31-36.
[21]梅洛-庞蒂.知觉现象学.姜志辉译.北京:商务印书馆,2001:504;511;512.
[22]笛卡尔.第一哲学沉思集.庞景仁译.北京:商务印书馆,1986:67;68;70-71.
[23]让-弗朗索瓦·利奥塔.话语,图形.谢晶译.上海:上海人民出版社,2012:218;3;3;1;218;226;255;262;262.
[24]于尔根·哈贝马斯.走出主体哲学的别一途径:交往理性与主体中心理性的对抗//汪民安等编.后现代性的哲学话语——从福柯到萨义德.杭州:浙江人民出版社,2011:377.
[25]梅洛-庞蒂.眼与心.戴修人译//陆扬编.二十世纪西方美学经典文本(第二卷):回归存在之源.上海:复旦大学出版社,2000:798;799.
[26]G.Roque.Boundaries of Visual Images:Presentation.Word&Image,2005,21(2):116.
[27]苏珊·朗格.艺术问题.滕守尧译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1983:128.
[28]赵宪章.语图互仿的顺势和逆势——文学与图像关系新论.中国社会科学,2011,3:177;88-89.
[29]R.Harris.Visual and Verbal Ambiguity,or Why Ceci was Never A Pipe.Word&Image,2005,21(2):182-187
[30]W.J.T.米歇尔.图像理论.陈永国译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006:54;55;55.
[31]刘涛.语境论:释义规则与视觉修辞分析.西北师大学报(社会科学版),2018,1.
[32]刘涛.隐喻论:转义生成与视觉修辞分析.湖南师范大学社会科学学报,2017,6:140-148.
[33]M.Squire.Corpus Imperii:Verbal and Visual Figurations of the Roman‘body politic’.Word&Image,2015,31(3):305-330.
[34]巴赫金.陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题.白春仁,顾亚铃译.上海:上海三联书店,1992:344.
[35]巴赫金.诗学与访谈.白春仁、顾亚铃译.石家庄:河北教育出版社,1998:4.
[36]C.Stroupe.The Rhetoric of Irritation:Inappropriateness as Visual/Literate Practice//A.H.Charles,H.Marguerite(Eds.).Defining Visual Rhetorics.Mahwah,NJ.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Inc,2004:243-258.
[37]朱立元.现代西方美学史.上海:上海文艺出版社,1993:1115.
[38]B.Shane.Defining Visual Rhetorics(Book review).Composition Studies,2005,33(2):122.
[39]G.Dickinson,C.M.Maugh.Placing Visual Rhetoric:Finding Material Comfort in Wild Oats Market//A.H.Charles,H.Marguerite(Eds.).Defining Visual Rhetorics.Mahwah,NJ.:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Inc,2004:303-314.
[40]刘涛.媒介·空间·事件:观看的“语法”与视觉修辞方法.南京社会科学,2017,9.
[41]周宪.审美现代性批判.北京:商务印书馆,2005:183.
基本信息:
DOI：10.14086/J.cnki.xwycbpl.2018.01.004
中图分类号:G206
引用信息:
[1]刘涛.语图论:语图互文与视觉修辞分析[J].新闻与传播评论,2018,71(01):28-41.DOI:10.14086/J.cnki.xwycbpl.2018.01.004.
基金信息:
2017年国家社会科学基金重大项目(17ZDA290); 国家社会科学基金重大项目“视觉修辞理论、方法与应用研究”的阶段性成果