透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.95.231.212
  • 學位論文

台灣政論節目中的攻擊策略

Verbal attacks in Taiwan's political talk shows

指導教授 : 張妙霞 博士
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


政論節目是一個引起社會、媒體界,以及政治圈廣泛討論及批評的一個議題,過去針對台灣政論節目所做的研究有很多,這些研究都提及在台灣的政論節目中,充斥著口水戰、偏頗、對立衝突的語言。然而,這些研究卻沒有針對台灣政論節目的攻擊語言作分析。   本文從收集的真實語料出發,分析了台灣三個政論節目:2100全民開講、新聞夜總會、新聞孤狗中用來攻擊他人的語言。結果發現,政論節目的主持人及來賓使用的攻擊策略包含了語言的各個層面,從音韻、構詞、語彙、句法、語義、到語用,呈現了多樣化及創意十足的語言使用。過去的研究發現,台灣政論節目中的語言能夠達到娛樂的效果,而本研究發現此娛樂效果來自於多樣化的語言使用。這些攻擊策略除了達到貶低他人形象的目的以外,有些還可製造幽默或增進團體之間的和諧及團結。   本文發現,三個節目中所用的攻擊語言數量差距不大,但各個節目中使用攻擊策略的偏好各不相同。大抵來說,新聞夜總會的語言是最具創意也最多樣化的,這可能跟節目偏向非正式、輕鬆的型態有關;2100全民開講則偏向使用直接的語彙作攻擊,此節目也是三個節目裡最正式、衝突性最強的。同一種策略在新聞夜總會可能是幽默及笑聲的來源,但在2100全民開講中卻很少出現。新聞夜總會和2100全民開講在屬性上均被歸於反對民進黨的政論節目,但兩者使用的攻擊策略及節目風格卻不相同,顯示攻擊性的語言與節目政黨傾向並無直接的關聯。新聞孤狗的節目型態及攻擊策略並沒有像前兩者這麼突出以及兩極化,是處於中間型態,也許是因為風格並不突出,所以播出數月即遭停播的命運。

並列摘要


The phenomenon of political talk show is a hotly discussed, debated, and often criticized issue. Previous studies have pointed out that entertainment and confrontation are two main features of the political talk show. However, these studies did not probe into how entertainment or confrontation is achieved by linguistic devices in discourse. This present paper is a data-driven study of how the participants in political talk shows employ verbal attack to degrade others and create entertaining effects. We chose three political talk shows in Taiwan as our databank: 2100 People All Talk (2100 全民開講), News Night Club (新聞夜總會), and News Google (新聞孤狗). The linguistic tokens for verbal aggression in the three programs are collected and then analyzed. The result showed that verbal attack tokens covered almost all levels of linguistics, including phonology, morphology, lexicology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. These diversified verbal attacks not only enable the host and guests to denigrate their opponents’ ability and personality but also build conversational humor and reinforce in-group solidarity. In terms of the frequency of verbal attack, the three talk shows did not show salient difference, but they were different when it comes to the quality and style of the verbal vilification. In general, News Night Club was found to be more humorous, more diversified and less formal in language use, while the verbal attacks in 2100 People All Talk were more direct. Additionally, the atmosphere in 2100 People All Talk was more formal and conflicting. For example, the same linguistic strategy made by the same speaker in News Night Club created collected laughter while the effect of humor did not show up in 2100 People All Talk. We also found out that talk shows which have similar political bias do not necessarily reveal similar styles of rhetorical devices. Although News Night Club and 2100 People All Talk are both anti-DPP talk shows, their styles in terms of verbal attack were not the same. At last, the quality and quantity of verbal attack in News Google are usually between News Night Club and 2100 People All Talk.

參考文獻


張卿卿 (2002)。〈競爭媒體使用對選民競選議題知識與政治效能感的影響—以兩千年總統大選為例,《選舉研究》,第9期,1-39頁。
楊意菁 (2004)。〈民意與公共性:批判解讀台灣電視談話節目〉,《新聞學研究》,第79期,1-47頁。
Ingram, David. 1978. Typology and universals of personal pronouns. Universals of Human Language, ed. by Joseph H. Greenberg, 214-247. Standford, California: Standford University Press.
Chiu, Chung-jung. 2004. From public sphere to public television: An analysis of political talk show in public television. MA thesis, Tamkang University.
張卿卿、羅文輝 (2007)。〈追求知識、認同或娛樂?政論性談話節目的內容與閱聽眾收視動機的探討〉,《新聞學研究》,第93期,83-139頁。

延伸閱讀