兩岸在關於彼此關係的論述上,可以分成三塊:一、在關係論述中統與獨的衝突;二、在現實論述中能力、價值等方面的衝突;三、論述風格差異引起的衝突。過去認為兩岸在認知上有衝突,指的是同一類論述風格之內的衝突。本文則認為,因為論述風格不同所引起在認知上的衝突,其在情感上所造成的不安,未必亞於統與獨之間的衝突。台北的優勢是可以熟練地轉移論述的風格,在這短期內有助於分散因為關係論述中的尖銳對立所引起的衝突,但長期下來因而累積了在北京方面的極度不安。此時台北的優勢就可能轉變成負債,因為在台灣,人們不理解為什麼大陸的人不能在論述風格上像台北一樣有彈性,這種不理解,使北京更難釋懷,為什麼台北可以週期地放下在應然或態度問題上的討論,突然變成一個分析家對大陸指指點點?
There have been two discursive styles existing in the cross-Taiwan Strait relationship: relational and realistic. The former is concerned with attitude, norm, and policy promotion and is spacio-temporally specific, while the latter is related to analysis, theory and behavioral prediction and is universal. Washington typically displays a realistic style in its statements and Beijing, a relational style. Taipei adopts both, using them alternatively. This paper argues that differences in discursive style may cause more anxiety than disputes within the same style.