從語藝觀點探討荒誕宗教廣播節目之認同策略

The Identification Strategies in Ridiculous Religious Broadcasting Programs: A Rhetorical Perspective

10.6123/JCRP.2011.029

蔡鴻濱(Hong-Pin Tsai)

認同 ； 終點視界 ； 重生的語藝 ； 群集批評 ； 英雄歷險 ； identification ； terministic screen ； the rhetoric of rebirth ； cluster criticism ； a hero's journey

傳播研究與實踐

1卷2期（2011 / 07 / 01）

211 - 243

繁體中文

本研究在於探討荒誕宗教廣播節目中言者的語藝策略，以及聽者認同的形成，對此研究者利用Burke的群集批評(cluster criticism)尋找語藝文本中的關鍵詞(key terms)群集後，並透過認同(identification)、實質共享(consubstantiality)、疏離(division/dissociation)、命名(naming)、重生的語藝(the rhetoric of rebirth)、終點視界(terministic screen)等語藝觀點，以及Campbell的「英雄歷險模式」析論、探討之。經過群集分析，得出此宗教節目中，強度與頻率較高的六個關鍵詞群集為：（一）聞聲救苦、無限靈驗的大王母娘娘；（二）老弱殘疾者藥到病除；（三）鬼魅魍魎為不幸的淵藪；（四）結緣商品加持護身；（五）自助者天助；（六）主持人乘願而來。研究者反思言者複誦的關鍵字群集發現，其內涵是Campbell英雄歷險之神話敘事結構的隱喻(metaphor)，是Burke實質共享（即認同）概念的實踐，更是言者的語藝策略，也是與聽者共享的價值。而言者的鬼神二元宗教觀，離苦得樂的追求，除了契合華人生活的宗教背景外，言者的神話語藝，更作為聽者重生的語藝，更讓聽者對言者凝聚力與認同感之產生，成為可能。

The study explores the identification rhetorical strategies and the formation of listener identification in ridiculous religious broadcasting programs. The author utilizes the cluster criticism of Kenneth Burke to find clusters of key words in religious broadcasting programs, and takes Joseph Campbell's model of a hero's journey to explain the implications of these clusters. After reading and categorizing the artifacts, six clusters emerged. By analyzing these clusters, the author found them to be a metaphor for the structure of heroic adventures, with the speaker representing the hero or God. In fact, by using this trick, the rhetor transforms listeners into followers.Other important concepts of Burke's thoughts, including consubstantiality, division, dissociation, naming, terministic screen, and the rhetoric of rebirth, are used to rethink the rhetorical/persuasive/identical meanings of artifacts. By doing so, the author proves that the Eastern religious culture bridges the identification between the rhetor and the listeners, and becomes the driving power in forming a community or identification among the listeners of religious broadcasting programs.

1. 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，93，83-139。
   連結：
2. 盛治仁(2005)。電視談話性節目研究─來賓、議題結構及閱聽人特質分析。新聞學研究，84，163-203。
   連結：
3. 陳婷玉、王舜偉(2004)。邊緣的媒體或賺錢的產業？─廣播賣藥節目的媒介生態分析。傳播與管理研究，4(1)，59-84。
   連結：
4. 陳婷玉、王舜偉(2006)。愚昧無知或享受參與─廣播賣藥節目的閱聽人分析。傳播與管理研究，5(2)，1-36。
   連結：
5. Burke, K. (1937). Attitudes toward history. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
6. Burke, K. (1941). The philosophy of literary form: Studies in symbolic action. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.
7. Appel, E. C.(1993).Kenneth Burke: Coy theologian.Journal of Communication and Religion,16,99-110.
8. Blankenship, J.,Sweeney, B.(1980).The 'energy' of form.Central States Speech Journal,31,172-183.
9. Brummett, B.(1981).Burkean scapegoating, mortification, and transcedence in presidential campaign rhetoric.Central States Speech Journal,32,254-264.
10. Brummett, B.(1984).Burke's representative anecdote as a method in media criticism.Critical Studies in Mass Communication,1,161-176.
11. Burke, K.(1968).Counter-Statement.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
12. Burke, K.(1984).Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
13. Burke, K.(1969).A grammar of motives.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
14. Burke, K.(1970).The rhetoric of religion: Studies in logology.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
15. Burke, K.(1966).Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature and method.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
16. Burke, K.(1969).A rhetoric of motives.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
17. Campbell, J.、Moyers, B.、朱侃如譯(1997)。神話：內在的旅程，英雄的冒險，愛情的故事。臺北:立緒。
18. Campbell, J.、朱侃如譯(1997)。千面英雄。臺北:立緒。
19. Foss, K. A.(1984).Singing the rhythm blues: An argumentative analysis of the birth-control debate in the Catholic church.Western Journal of Speech Communication,47,29-44.
20. Foss, S. K.(2009).Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice.Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
21. Foss, S. K.(2004).Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice.Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
22. Foss, S. K.(Ed.)(2004).Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice.Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
23. Foss, S. K.,Foss, K. A.,Trapp, R.(2002).Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric.Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
24. Foss, S. K.,Foss, K. A.,Trapp, R.(1991).Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric.Prospect Heights, IL:Waveland Press.
25. Foss, S. K.、Foss, K. A.、Trapp, R.、林靜伶譯(1996)。當代語藝觀點。臺北:五南。
26. Herrick, J. A.(2009).The history and theory of rhetoric: An introduction.Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
27. Hoban, J. L., Jr.(1977).Solzhenitsyn on détente: A study of perspective by incongruity.Southern Speech Communication Journal,42,163-177.
28. Kennedy, G. A.(1999).Classical rhetoric & its Christian and secular tradition from ancient to modern times.Chapel Hill, NC:University of North Carolina Press.
29. Reid, K.(1990).The Hay-Wain: Cluster analysis in visual communication.Journal of Communication Inquiry,14,40-54.
30. Wolin, R.(2001).The rhetorical imagination of Kenneth Burke.Columbia, SC:University of South Carolina Press.
31. 洪文俊(1998)。公娼與核廢料─臺灣弱勢族群反對運動的語藝分析。1998中華傳播學會年會，臺灣，臺北:
32. 洪文俊(1998)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。輔仁大學大眾傳播研究所。
33. 高菁黛(1999)。美伊雙方領袖論述的群集分析─以兩次波斯灣危機（1990 & 1998）為例。1999 中華傳播學會年會，臺灣，臺北:
34. 教育部國語推行委員會編(2007)。重編國語辭典修訂本。
35. 楊意菁(2004)。民意與公共性：批判解讀臺灣電視談話節目。新聞學研究，79，1-47。
36. 鄭志明(2001)。臺灣民眾宗教信仰的生死關懷與靈驗性格。輔仁宗教研究，3，1-53。

1. 劉大華、黃鈴媚、曹開明(2017)。數位語藝批評與文本探勘工具─以反核臉書粉絲團形塑幻想主題為例。資訊社會研究，32，9-50。