基于吴英案专家评论的批判话语分析

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Experts' Commentaries on WU Ying Lawsuit Case

吴英集资案二审判决引起网络热议,法学、经济学等领域不少专家对此案判决结果提出质疑,这一现象引起学界深思。运用van Dijk T A提出的认知语境分析理论,分析专家针对吴英案判决发表评论的语言策略,探讨专家构建的总体立场,揭示专家话语所折射的观念,以期发现专家在重大法律案件中所扮演的角色及对司法公正的影响。研究发现:专家主要通过使用情态、反诘句和关系过程等语言策略构建立场;专家对吴英案的立场主要表现为对非法集资法律规制、金融垄断、司法和政府宏观调控的批判和对吴英集资行为的辩护;专家评论折射出民间借贷的合法性和金融市场去垄断化等观念。

The online campaign of saving WU Ying,a woman entrepreneur,followed up by offline actions is not only an attempt to defend WU Ying against death penalty but also a struggle for the rights of private entrepreneurs and the freedom of market economy.This paper,adopting a socio-cognitive approach to discourse,attempts to deconstruct experts' opinions on WU Ying Lawsuit Case,and to reveal the underling ideologies involved in their commentaries.It is found that experts mainly resort to three linguistic strategies in constructing their stance:modality,rhetorical questions and relational process;the general stances thus constructed are criticism of laws on underground fundraising,financial monopoly and the macro-regulation on the part of the judicial and administrative governments,accompanied by defense of WU Ying's fundraising;the principal ideologies uncovered are the legitimacy of the private fundraising and de-monopolization of financial market.