英语论文网

s as a sort of political science. In the Roman Empire therhetorical tradition played a part in the training of orators who fulfilled important publicfunctions, including political functions. As rhetoric was studied mainly for politicalpurpose, the study of rhetoric was closely related to that of political speaking. Its study canbe traced as far back as to about 480 B.C. when the Greek philosopher Corax beganteaching the art of public speaking who originated some of the basic structures includingthe organizational structures of a speech and the elements of persuasion (Hasling 1993; 19).He laid the groundwork for scholars like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.Aristotle provided us with the classical definition of rhetoric. He said, "Let rhetoricbe defined as an ability, in each particular case to see the available means ofpersuasion...This is the function of no other art, for each of the others is instructive andpersuasive about its own subject..." (Aristotle in Hasling 1993: 19) Other scholars alsogave their own definitions of rhetoric from ancient times to our days: “the art of speakingwell—that is to say, with knowledge, skill and elelgance" (Cecero); “the findng of suitablearguments to prove a given point, and the skillful arrangement of them” (Whately); theprocess of “adjusting ideas to people and people to ideas,’ (Bryant). (Gill & Whedbee 1997:157)
…………

2.2 Linguistic perspectives on political public speech
As has been discussed, political speeches have been studied by scholars from avariety of disciplines including sociology, political science, and media studies. However, asthese bear little relation to any linguistic theory, their contributions to the analysis ofpolitical speeches will not be reviewed here. What this thesis is concerned with is a reviewof previous linguistic study of political speeches.Political speeches，a sub-type of public speeches, fall also within the domain ofpolitical discourse. Many linguistic approaches to political discourse are applicable to theanalysis of political speech, and still linguists often take political speeches as a typical kindof political discourse to illustrate their approaches. Chilton and Schaffner (1997)，bysummarizing the literatures on political discourse analysis and taking historicalspecificities of particular countries and cultures into consideration, clarify the approachesinto three categories: French, German, and Anglophone. In the same paper they advocatethat in relating political behavior to linguistic analysis of discourse, all levels and aspectsof language need to be borne in mind. An analysis of political discourse needs to refer to:pragmatics (interaction amongst speakers and hearers); semantics (meaning, structure oflexicon); and syntax (the internal organization of sentences) (Chilton & Schaffner, 1997).
…………

Chapter Three Theoretical Framework: Interpersonal Meaning......... 12
3.1 Mood: clause as exchange......... 12
3.1.1 Speech Roles and Functions......... 12
3.1.2 Elements of Mood .........15
3.1.3 Structures of Mood......... 17
3.1.4 Grammatical Metaphor of Mood......... 18
3.2 Modality .........19
Chapter Four Methodology......... 24
4.1 Data Collection .........24
4.2 Analytical Approach......... 25
Chapter 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。