本文選題：身份認(rèn)同 + 話語(yǔ)權(quán)　； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本論文主要研究的對(duì)象是克里米亞危機(jī)中的各方話語(yǔ)。以各方擁有的政治話語(yǔ)權(quán)為前提,從歷史淵源和現(xiàn)代因素的角度,探究了俄羅斯和烏克蘭對(duì)各自民族身份認(rèn)同的發(fā)展。本論文著眼于克里米亞公投合法化的斗爭(zhēng),以及國(guó)家間的話語(yǔ)較量。本篇論文的目的是:探究克里米亞危機(jī)中,各方所掌握的話語(yǔ)在烏克蘭和俄羅斯兩個(gè)國(guó)家身份認(rèn)同塑造中的作用。這次研究嘗試解構(gòu)并系統(tǒng)化由特定一方運(yùn)用的話語(yǔ)工具。烏克蘭革命之后,克里米亞事件從一開(kāi)始就一直是各方面進(jìn)行不同解讀的焦點(diǎn)。與以往的許多革命一樣,這次革命也同樣不是僅發(fā)生在烏克蘭一國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)的孤立事件,烏克蘭革命幾乎演變成為改變世界秩序的突破點(diǎn)。至于這個(gè)世界是會(huì)由零和的軍事主導(dǎo)的現(xiàn)實(shí)主義對(duì)峙塑造,還是由一種新的對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)世界的解讀塑造,還有待考察。這篇論文主要研究的問(wèn)題是:克里米亞危機(jī)中的話語(yǔ)在烏克蘭國(guó)家身份認(rèn)同塑造中起到了什么樣的作用。基于歷史背景以及相關(guān)理論,我提出以下假設(shè):克里米亞危機(jī)中的話語(yǔ)有助于烏克蘭國(guó)家身份認(rèn)同的轉(zhuǎn)型。A.烏克蘭和俄羅斯政治領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的話語(yǔ)集中在民族團(tuán)結(jié)、國(guó)家能力和民族個(gè)性等方面。B.外交機(jī)構(gòu)的話語(yǔ)服務(wù)于共同的歷史和合作的需要。話語(yǔ)與身份認(rèn)同是緊密聯(lián)系的,這在克里米亞危機(jī)中每一方不同的話語(yǔ)中得以體現(xiàn)。歐盟很難去平衡各成員國(guó)間的意見(jiàn),作為擁有強(qiáng)大話語(yǔ)的美國(guó)有時(shí)也很難實(shí)現(xiàn)國(guó)內(nèi)的統(tǒng)一認(rèn)同。而與之不同的是,將強(qiáng)硬原則作為其行動(dòng)準(zhǔn)則的俄羅斯則擁有著更高的身份入同和話語(yǔ)權(quán),烏克蘭則訴諸于國(guó)際法和情感號(hào)召。在話語(yǔ)斗爭(zhēng)中,政治角色通常會(huì)嘗試去描述他們國(guó)家的未來(lái)以達(dá)到利益的平衡的目的。研究過(guò)程中運(yùn)用了批判性話語(yǔ)分析的方法。本項(xiàng)研究是根植于米歇爾·福柯的"話語(yǔ)理論",即社會(huì)中的權(quán)力關(guān)系是通過(guò)話語(yǔ)和實(shí)踐表達(dá)出來(lái)的。批判性話語(yǔ)分析是進(jìn)行話語(yǔ)權(quán)研究的跨學(xué)科研究方法,其主要觀點(diǎn)是:話語(yǔ)是社會(huì)實(shí)踐的一種形式。傳統(tǒng)的批判性話語(yǔ)分析工作者一般認(rèn)為無(wú)話語(yǔ)的社會(huì)實(shí)踐和有話語(yǔ)的社會(huì)實(shí)踐是相互促進(jìn)形成的,而他們的關(guān)注重點(diǎn)是如何利用話語(yǔ)權(quán),建設(shè)或加強(qiáng)社會(huì)權(quán)力關(guān)系。對(duì)任何危機(jī)沖突的研究都是需要相關(guān)知識(shí)和歷史文化背景的。而對(duì)克里米亞危機(jī)的案例的分析則需要依靠媒體和官方的相關(guān)報(bào)告。這些報(bào)告都是有關(guān)復(fù)雜的克里米亞和俄羅斯歷史、話語(yǔ)權(quán)問(wèn)題研究、由前蘇聯(lián)宣傳系統(tǒng)利用的特定語(yǔ)言代碼、烏克蘭的民族電影、新意識(shí)形態(tài)支持下的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)修辭,以及一些專(zhuān)業(yè)的講話。我們見(jiàn)證了太多的信息戰(zhàn);而話語(yǔ)對(duì)于一個(gè)國(guó)家的角色認(rèn)定和身份認(rèn)同的建立或重建,以及重新書(shū)寫(xiě)歷史是具有直接意義的。本文的資料有以下幾個(gè)基本來(lái)源。政府官方話語(yǔ)主要包括首相、總統(tǒng)或其他政府官員的演說(shuō)、聲明和采訪。雖然我們要始終記得"新聞是具有偏向性的"這一句話,但不可否認(rèn)在采訪和新聞發(fā)布會(huì)中,覆蓋面廣泛的媒體確實(shí)提供了主要信息來(lái)源。本篇論文共包含五章。第一章是有關(guān)這一研究的導(dǎo)論:第二章將重點(diǎn)放在了烏克蘭與俄羅斯關(guān)系的歷史話語(yǔ)權(quán)背景;第三章講述了話語(yǔ)和身份建設(shè)的理論背景;第四章致力于對(duì)所收集數(shù)據(jù)的分析研究,這些數(shù)據(jù)是從政要的演說(shuō)和采訪、官方渠道以及俄羅斯和烏克蘭媒體收集來(lái)的:而在論文的末章,對(duì)本篇論文進(jìn)行了總結(jié),并且闡述了長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)研究的方向和目標(biāo)。本篇論文開(kāi)始于一個(gè)假設(shè):代表一國(guó)的政治領(lǐng)袖的話語(yǔ)權(quán)大小取決于民族團(tuán)結(jié)、國(guó)家能力以及民族個(gè)性。通過(guò)對(duì)烏克蘭和俄羅斯?fàn)幾h領(lǐng)土的關(guān)注,俄羅斯總統(tǒng)的話語(yǔ)超出了國(guó)家領(lǐng)土邊界的設(shè)置。他利用俄、烏共同的政治歷史,以及共同的文化,促進(jìn)了跨國(guó)民族團(tuán)結(jié)和本國(guó)國(guó)家能力的提高。類(lèi)似這樣的話語(yǔ)建設(shè)手段也被其他國(guó)家廣泛采用。烏克蘭總理對(duì)于話語(yǔ)的建設(shè)更多關(guān)注于國(guó)內(nèi)政治環(huán)境和個(gè)人政治權(quán)力地位的合法性。考慮到受"Maidan"組織影響的愛(ài)國(guó)主義,他利用烏克蘭反抗俄羅斯的歷史來(lái)維護(hù)民族團(tuán)結(jié)。然而,與俄羅斯總統(tǒng)話語(yǔ)建設(shè)相比,烏克蘭總統(tǒng)的做法單一且脆弱,缺乏大國(guó)建設(shè)的目標(biāo)。因此,本文驗(yàn)證了假設(shè)一的合理性:民族團(tuán)結(jié)、國(guó)家能力以及民族個(gè)性會(huì)影響一個(gè)國(guó)家的身份認(rèn)同,影響政治領(lǐng)袖的話語(yǔ)。雖然官方外交手段通常設(shè)法在一個(gè)固定對(duì)話框架下,傳達(dá)出一個(gè)清楚的信息,但不得不說(shuō)官方外交的話語(yǔ)依舊受制于固定的體制和其他特殊需求。我們可以清楚地看出,俄羅斯外交機(jī)構(gòu)的話語(yǔ)有很明顯的強(qiáng)權(quán)政治特征。烏克蘭外交機(jī)構(gòu)的話語(yǔ)權(quán)在很大程度上有很深的特殊限制,并且沒(méi)有什么明顯特征。因此可以看出假設(shè)二是有誤的:外交機(jī)構(gòu)的話語(yǔ)權(quán)并不是由共同的歷史和合作的需求決定的。從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看,本文應(yīng)該繼續(xù)更加擴(kuò)大話語(yǔ)權(quán)研究分析范圍,比如對(duì)主流媒體和邊緣媒體、政府反對(duì)派,甚至包括社會(huì)媒體的話語(yǔ)權(quán)研究。如果歐洲的權(quán)力重組、俄羅斯文明復(fù)蘇甚至世界秩序的重建等趨勢(shì)成為現(xiàn)實(shí)的話,我們就要時(shí)刻警醒克里米亞這個(gè)被地緣政治所毒害的半島。
[Abstract]:The main object of this thesis is the discourse of the parties in the Crimea crisis. Based on the political discourse power of the parties, the development of the identity of their respective nationalities is explored from the perspective of historical origin and modern factors. This thesis focuses on the struggle for the legalization of the referendum in Crimea and the discourse between the States. The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of the discourse in the identity of two countries in Ukraine and Russia during the Crimea crisis. This study attempts to deconstruct and systematize the utterance tools used by a particular party. After the Ukraine revolution, the Crimea incident has been in all aspects from the beginning. The focus of different interpretations. Like many previous revolutions, the revolution was also not only an isolated incident in one country in Ukraine, and the Ukraine revolution has almost evolved into a breakthrough in changing the world order. As for the world, it will be shaped by a zero sum military dominated realism or a new one. The main issue of this paper is: what role does the discourse in the Crimea crisis play in the shaping of Ukraine national identity. Based on the historical background and related theories, I put forward the following hypothesis: the discourse in the Crimea crisis helps Ukraine national identity. The discourse of the political leaders of the.A. Ukraine and Russia concentrates on the national unity, the national capacity and the national personality of the.B. diplomatic agencies to serve the needs of the common history and cooperation. The discourse and identity are closely linked, which can be reflected in the different words of each party in the crisis of Crimea. It is difficult to balance the views between the members of the member states. As an American with a strong discourse, it is sometimes difficult to realize the unified identity of the country. Unlike it, Russia has a higher identity and the right to speak, and Ukraine appeals to international law and emotional appeal. The political role usually tries to describe the future of their country in order to achieve a balance of interests. In the course of the study, the method of critical discourse analysis is used. This study is rooted in Michel Volker's "discourse theory", that is, the power relations in society are expressed through speech and Practice. Critical discourse analysis is a method of discourse analysis. The main point of the study of discourse right is that discourse is a form of social practice. The traditional critical discourse analysis workers generally believe that the social practice without discourse and the social practice of discourse are mutually promoted, and their focus is how to use the right of discourse to build or strengthen society. Power relations. The study of any crisis conflict needs relevant knowledge and historical and cultural background. The analysis of the case of the Crimea crisis needs to rely on the media and official related reports. These reports are related to the complex history of Crimea and Russia, the study of the right of discourse, and the use of the former Soviet propaganda system. The specific language code, the national film in Ukraine, the war rhetoric supported by the new ideology, and some professional speeches. We have witnessed too much information warfare; the discourse is of direct significance to the establishment or reconstruction of a country's role and identity, as well as the history of rewriting. The information of this article is the following Government discourse mainly includes the speeches, statements and interviews of the prime minister, the president or other government officials. Although we must always remember the phrase "the news is biased", it is undeniable that the media with wide coverage do provide the main source of information in interviews and press conferences. It contains five chapters. The first chapter is an introduction to this study: the second chapter focuses on the historical context of the relations between Ukraine and Russia; the third chapter describes the theoretical background of the construction of discourse and identity; the fourth chapter is devoted to the analysis of the collected data, which are political speeches and interviews, official channels and In the final chapter of the Russian and Ukraine media, the final chapter of the paper is summed up and the direction and goal of the long-term study is expounded. This paper begins with a hypothesis that the power of discourse on behalf of a country's political leaders depends on national unity, national ability and national character. Through the Ukraine and Russia The Russian President's discourse exceeded the national territorial boundaries. He used Russia, the Ukrainian political history, and the common culture to promote national unity and the improvement of national capacity. Similar discourse construction is also widely adopted by his country. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Building more attention to the legitimacy of the domestic political environment and the status of the political power of the individual. Considering the patriotism affected by the "Maidan" organization, he used Ukraine to resist the Russian history to maintain national unity. However, compared with the Russian President's discourse construction, the practice of the president of Ukraine is single and fragile and lacks the goal of building a big country. Therefore, this article verifies the reasonableness of the assumption that national unity, national capacity, and national personality affect the identity of a country and influence the discourse of political leaders. Although official diplomacy usually tries to convey a clear message under a fixed Dialogue framework, it has to be said that official diplomacy is still subject to the words. In a fixed system and other special needs, we can clearly see that the discourse of the Russian diplomatic agency has a distinct power political feature. The discourse power of the Ukraine diplomatic agency has very deep special limitations and has no obvious characteristics. Therefore, it can be seen that the assumption that two is wrong: the diplomatic agency The right of discourse is not determined by the needs of common history and cooperation. In the long run, this article should continue to expand the scope of the research and analysis of the discourse power, such as the study of the discourse power of the mainstream media and the marginal media, the government opposition, and even the social media. If the European power is reorganized, the Russian civilization is revive even the world rank. We should always wake up the Crimea peninsula which is poisoned by geopolitics.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D851.13;D851.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 葛軍;克里米亞之爭(zhēng)[J];世界知識(shí);1992年09期

2 顧志紅;克里米亞大選[J];東歐中亞研究;1994年04期

3 長(zhǎng)弓;克里米亞風(fēng)波又起[J];國(guó)際展望;1995年08期

4 孔寒冰;;政治之島——克里米亞[J];世界知識(shí);2010年02期

5 沈法良;俄羅斯與烏克蘭的克里米亞歸屬之爭(zhēng)[J];w蕓，

本文編號(hào)：1863258